Skip to main content

Reading Journal in New Perspectives to Film Culture: " From Personal, It Becomes Relational"


From Personal, It Becomes Relational
(May 15, 2018)

While the definition of documentary films continue to change along with the advancements of techniques, technology and production processes and exhibition, one culminating definition can be traced within Bill Nichol’s writing on “How Can We Define Documentary Film” (2010), where he defines the it in three ways: (1) that it must be about something that actually happened, (2) that it must be about real people, and (3) that it must tell stories about what happens in the real world (7-10). With this definition in mind, it is easy to deduce that documentaries are the raw, unedited video clips using the same raw sounds that convey a story. However, as it was further explained by Nichols, the process of production of documentaries also involve editorial techniques, though they differ than those from fictional films in that they are applied in order to gather as many facts about the concept into creating one comprehensible message, called evidentiary editing. It should also be noted that during production, there would be times when different sponsors, companies, and most recently a fad, different international film bodies and organizations (such as IDFA)  become co-producers of the documentary film, which in turn allows further need for editing and reorganization of the narrative. In effect, the documentary film is anything but the raw footage, for it is a carefully selected series of shots that is made to convey a central idea. This can be attributed back to John Grierson’s notion of “documentary as the creative treatment of actuality” (Nichols, 2010, 6). As such, issues that what would normally be considered too obvious and easily ignored within society, are given fresh perspectives and brought to the fore. This is why a documentary film must be about reality, because its primary focus is the reality that is often left out of the ideal, or in some case, it is the ideal that is not represented or experienced in reality (such as the case of "The City" 1939 by Steiner and Van Dyke).

With regard to this, however, there are a certain questions that come to mind. First of all, if there are outside actors involved in the production (such as in the case of international film organizations co-producing), I believe that there will be a problem within the national tradition through which the documentary film may find itself alienated from, and by criteria would be closer to a transnational filmmaking practice. Different countries, nowadays, may have their own documentary filmmaking tradition, of which their broadcast and film institutions abide to and are familiar with their audience. In this manner, I believe that there will be signs of resistance when international production techniques are incorporated, or a resistance to the virtue and veracity knowing there will be differing intentions involved in International or transnational co-productions. Taking Philippines as an example, there is a rich documentary film tradition that lies heavily within mass media and broadcast communications, hence it is often deeply rooted and thought of as part of journalism as opposed to film production practices. In fact, most of the documentary films are, in actuality, documentary series, experienced from watching at televisions and produced by the major broadcasting networks and directed by acclaimed journalists, as opposed to feature length films produced by mainstream film productions and directors shown in cinemas. Thus, this creates a different sort of film culture and tradition within documentary as a genre.

Another question I have pertains to authenticity, that which what makes a documentary film about a real person different from the treatments of a Bio-pic film? While both addresses issues and makes use of relevant facts pertaining to the real authentic person in question, would one be considered inferior over the other through presentation or by other means? And if not, I believe that there constitutes a blurring of the line between a personal documentary film and a bio-pic, of which, the uninitiated might not be able to tell the difference, and consider both as similar by intent and production.

These questions concerning documentary filmmaking and production, towards its choice subject and agency, often hinge on what is considered a real issue (that it deals with reality). But reality, itself, may not necessarily be the same for people across the world, considering the limitations brought by geographical locations, political status, etc. However, what the documentary film may actually achieve is to create a face within the imagined community. As Anderson explains, “it is imagined because the members of even the smallest nation will never know most of their fellow-members, meet them, or even hear of them, yet in the minds of each lives the image of their communion” (1983, 49). Although it may not necessarily mean that each one will know the other by face or name, it is the experience being shared, with actual facts and exploration, that allows the reconstruction of the imagined community into something more tangible. I believe, this is why documentary films cannot be solely considered as part of a particular national narrative (national cinema); it must be transnational, because while it presents issues that are immediate (by proximity value), they resonate in a global scale.

Words: 863



Works Cited:
1. Anderson, Benedict. 1983. “Introduction”, Imagined Communities. Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. Revised Edition. First published by Verso.

2. Nichols, Bill. 2010. “How Can We Define Documentary Film”, Introduction to Documentary (second edition), Bloomington & Indianapolis: Indiana University Press: 1-41

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Bibliography: " Game Design as Narrative Architecture" (2004) by Henry Jenkins

Jenkins, Henry. 2004. “Game Design as Narrative Architecture.” In First Person: New Media as Story, Performance, and Game , edited by Noah Wardrip-Fruin and Pat Harrigan, 118–30. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. In this article, Jenkins examines games less as stories than as spaces ripe with narrative possibility. He list downs the characteristics of games as defined by current Ludology versus Narratology debates such as: (1) not all games tell stories but they do have narrative aspirations, follows genre entertainment and previous narrative experiences; (2) narrative analysis need not be prescriptive; (3) games should not be reduced to the experience of a story; and (4) if games tell stories, they are unlikely to tell them in the same ways that other media tell stories for games as a medium, specifically, is what distinguishes them from other narrative traditions. He also lists down the problems and limitations within the current game study discourses, often pointing out how ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Precis + Critical Response Paper: " The Imaginary" (2006) Chapter 1 part 1 by Claudia Strauss

Reevaluating Scholarships (October 17, 2019) In Claudia Strauss’s article “The Imaginary” (2006), she gives a detailed discussion and analysis of the major scholarships in cultural studies regarding the matter of the Imaginaries, such as the works of Castoriadis, Lacan, Anderson, and Taylor, in order to map out the essential arguments that are more popularly being used/cited in cultural studies research, before she examines how Ivy uses these concepts with regard to the national-imaginaries with the Japanese socio-cultural sphere. In summary, Strauss explains that Castoriadis was concerned with "concepts of cultural abstraction, reification and homogenization, while Lacan used the concept of the imaginary to explain fantasies, and Anderson and Taylor used the concept for explaining cultural models as potentially valuable when used with person-centered ethnographic methods to study real rather than abstract cultural subjects” (323). Despite the summation of the the...
Post a Comment
Read more

Precis: "The Invention of the Martial Arts: Kano Jigoro and Kodokan Judo" (1998) by Inoue Shun

In Inoue Shun’s “The Invention of the Martial Arts: Kano Jigoro and Kodokan Judo” (1998), Inoue explores the modern invention, and subsequent reinvention, of the Japanese martial arts by an examination of Kodokan judo (163). This is done through a detailed discussion of Kano’s decision and active participation of creating the new martial arts such as: conception, process of modernization through scientification of the martial arts, promotions and competitions, institutionalizations and adoptions into various agencies (government institutions, universities, etc.), establishment of the Kodokan Cultural Association (promotion of the basic principles of Kodokan judo as well as serving as a legitimate infrastructure and governing body that actively promotes the new martial arts ideology), its inevitable re-invention post-Kano years by the Dai Nihon Butokukai (leading to an ultranationalistic role), and finally, a return to the sportification of budo post-WW2 in order to escape censorship wh...
Post a Comment
Read more