Documentary essay PDF

Preview

Summary

Essay on defining documentary...

Description

EILISH FRAIN, ESSAY 1 Define ‘documentary’, explaining the reasons for your definition.

By definition Documentary is known to be using pictures or interviews with people involved in real events to provide a factual report on a particular subject. “Documentary is A story offering access to THE world” (Nichols, 1991, 109). It is a genre of movie using images which when edited together creates a story, viewpoint or message. When looking at a documentary it varies from film to film, Bill Nichols outlined six modes of documentaries, poetic, expository, observational, participatory, reflexive and performative. In each of these subgenres, there is are numerous ways in which the documentary filmmakers can explore their narrative, or nonnarrative for their audience. ‘It is possible to argue that documentary film has never had a very precise definition’. (Nichols, 2001) In this essay, I will discuss the different ways in which documentary differs and how that can be used to define it, if it can be defined at all.

To define documentary, we have to look at the different types of documentary and modes of filming it. A documentary film may be filmed observationally, as though it is like “a fly on the wall”. Observational documentaries are said to be when the ‘filmmaker adopts a peculiar mode of presence on the scene in which he or she appears invisible and non-participatory’ (Nichols, 2001). The filmmaker remains a neutral observer, nothing is staged for the camera and so the changes in the environment are captured in real time. The authenticity of this mode of documentary could be used to define it, being that everything is natural and what we take away from that film is factual and our own interpretation of it. Many documentaries such as the documentary programme, 24 Hours in a&e (2011), where the cameras are placed around the hospital recording, means that there is a large amount of footage and what ends up in the programme is an edited down version of it. The way in which it is recorded and edited, selecting what and how it will be seen. Many would define documentary as ‘recording reality’, however after all the editing it goes through before being seen, can we define documentary as that. It is factual what is being shown to us except after being edited and the

1

EILISH FRAIN, ESSAY 1 editor adding a narrative to it, its adapting the idea of reality as it is not the raw footage, it is what the editor wants us to see. However, it can be argued that ‘the continuous mechanical recording of a raw tape lacks the touch of someone selecting and editing for the purpose of expressing or communicating something to someone.’ (Juel, 2015) This discusses the idea that without editing the film, there would be no message behind what is being shown to us. The way in which music and different camerawork is used in a film can enhance an emotion in the viewer and therefore can change how the image is being seen. For example, using a slow piece of music behind a clip, can cause the viewers to look at that with more sympathy or that it’s sad. Therefore, to try and define documentary in the way in which it is edited and then shown to us can be difficult because documentary can be a personal preference to the documentary director as they are the ones deciding how they want to define the documentary, this however does not mean that the film is being changed into non-fiction as the overall image is factual.

Nanook of the North (1922), is a significant non-fiction film, Robert Flaherty explores his time in Canada, observing Eskimos and documenting them in particular the life of Nanook and his family, observing the migration of a group of people far removed from civilisation. ‘There are investigative films in which the filmmaker knowingly deceives its subject in order to infiltrate a group of people, or expose a criminal act and we deem such intrusions justifiable.’ (Glynne, 2012) Nanook of the North differs from this as we know it contains scenes which are staged deliberately and the people within it are not actually who they are in real life, the family not actually being a family. ‘Flaherty's story, did not really happen; it is literally a fiction.’ (Sloniowski, 1998) The audience is led to believe that the footage they are viewing is the truth, however in this instance to define documentary it is difficult to do because, Grierson’s definition of a documentary is that it is a ‘creative interpretation of actuality’, this allows for the filmmaker, in this example Flaherty, to distort the truth in order to catch the true spirit of the subject, and so although it is not technically the truth it is still classed under the genre of documentary. Documentaries represent reality to some extent but the approach in which they

2

EILISH FRAIN, ESSAY 1 come about can alter the line between reality and fiction. ‘Documentaries offer aural and visual representations of some parts of the historical world’ (Nichols, 2001) This argument backs up Grierson's definition, the footage we are shown through this is a version of historical truth, the people are being used a ‘social actors’, living a life that is non-fiction. However, we have to think would they be living the same without the presence of the camera and if not, does that therefore mean that the defining a documentary cannot be said to be a completely factual report.

Another way to look at documentary, is at how highly subjective and personal it is. Documentaries, no matter how observational, are subjective due to the fact that when a filmmaker is behind a camera and is creating a documentary, it is hard not to place their own thoughts and ideas into it as it is them making it. It can be objective as the camera and equipment is never seen, but in post-production the editing can change the way in which it comes across. The bias personal beliefs, perspective thoughts, interpretations and opinions are shown, this can be said to fail capturing reality, selecting the information that they want to include in the documentary. ‘Subjectivity is seen as a thematic field in its own right, including the subjectivity of film and programme makers themselves in self-representation through images and voices.’ (Renov, 2004) Documentary can be defined as looking deeply into a subject with an ethical, political and aesthetic approach. Kahana argued that ‘documentary can be seen as a ‘democratic’ form of culture as it represents ‘real’ people, raises social discussion and imposes itself as a form of mass communication’ (Kahana, 2008) Agnes Varda’s documentary, Les Glaneurs et la Glaneuse (2000), is an example of this as she gives us her perspective on the gleaners, we see her perspective, but she does not conclude to wether she believes it is right or not, she just shows it as it is. Varda states the facts without forcing her beliefs or judgement onto the documentary. The only time we see a subjective opinion being stated is when they talk about the laws, but she still asks for everyone elses opinion and allows for other voices to be heard not just her own. Although this is true, there is an underlying critique that cannot be helped with a documentary. Barbara Kopples Harlam

3

EILISH FRAIN, ESSAY 1 County (1972), is another example, however unlike Vardas, we see a strong voice and the miners not speaking for themselves, Kopple is not a miner and is controlling the situation of what is being shown and told unlike in John Gaventa, Harlem County Tapes (1972), where we can see the miners leading how they want it to go. ‘We take exception to the blanket condemnation of documentary and to the assumption that more radical documentaries alone would solve basic social issues, or that the failure to solve pressing issues demonstrates the impotence of those documentaries that attempt to address them.’ (Nichols, 2001)

To conclude, documentary cannot simply be defined by a particular meaning. It is a broad subject and due to the subjectivity and complexity, many people will have opposing definitions of what documentary actually is, based on their views of documentaries. Documentary blurs the line between nonfiction and fiction, we often considered that actors belong to fiction films, but if we look at actors recreating an event in order to help us understand how something happened, by using the actors does that make it not a documentary. We can see the differences in the definitions based on the type of documentary, and the way in which it is handled with in post-production and how that can affect the authenticity of what is being given to the audience. Documentaries can be defined in many ways although the overall conclusion we can see throughout this essay, is that they all contain factual truths, whether adapted or not.

Bibliography Bill Nichols, Introduction to Documentary (Indiana University Press, 2001) Jonathan Kahana, The Politics of American Documentary (Columbia University Press, 2008) Andy Glynne, Documentaries and how to make them (Creative Essentials, 2013, 2nd Edition) Grant Sloniowski, Documenting the Documentary (Wayne State University Press, 1998)

4

EILISH FRAIN, ESSAY 1 Michael Renov, The Subject in Documentary (University of Minnesota Press, 2004)

http://www.caos205.medadada.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Defining-DocumentaryFilm_Henrik-Juel1.pdf https://www.premiumbeat.com/blog/6-types-of-documentary-film/

5...