The Image Mirrored Reflexivity and the Documentary Film - Jay Ruby

The Image Mirrored: Reflexivity and the Documentary Film Author(s): JAY RUBY Source: Journal of the University Film Association, Vol. 29, No. 4, THE DOCUMENTARY IMPULSE: CURRENT ISSUES (Fall 1977), pp. 3-11 Published by: University of Illinois Press on behalf of the University Film & Video Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20687384 . Accessed: 28/03/2013 10:16 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

University of Illinois Press and University Film & Video Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the University Film Association.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 143.106.201.36 on Thu, 28 Mar 2013 10:16:30 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The Image Mirrored: Reflexivity and the Documentary Film JAY RUBY Department of Anthropology Temple University

who

Anyone

that

recognizes

self-reflection,

/ am convinced thatfilmmakers along with anthropologists have the ethical,political, aesthetic, and scientificobligations to be reflexiveand self-criticalabout theirwork. Indeed, I would expand thatmandate to

as

mediated linguistically,is integralto thecharacter ization

of human

social

conduct,

must

acknow

ledge that such holds also for his own activities

as

a

social

'researcher',

'analyst',

etc.

include -ANTHONY

My topic is the concept of reflexivityas itapplies to the documentary film. Before I can approach this subject, I must firstbrieflyexamine the para meters of reflexivity, situate it in a historical cultural context, and discuss my own relationship to

the concept.

To be ideologically consistent, I should and will now situatemy thoughtswithin my own history, in other words, be reflexive about my ideas of reflexivity.In the process of organizing the 1974 Conference on Visual Anthropology, I organized a series of screenings and discussions entitled "Exposing

The

Yourself."

panelists?Sol

Worth,

Gerry O'Grady, Bob Sch?lte, Richard Chalfen a group

and

myself?discussed ical, self-referential

and

of autobiograph made films self-consciously

in terms of a variety of concerns within visual and

communication

anthropology.

Some

of those

films and ideas have formed the basis for my

discussion

here.

that

I am

who

manipulates system for

partisan.

a symbolic reason.

any

You will find little direct empirical support for such

my

statements sweeping focus is more modest.

in this paper. Instead, to concentrate

I intend

on a discussion of themanifestations of reflexivity in documentary

films.

As a means of delineating the concept, let us examine the following diagram borrowed from Fabian's

Johannes

article,

"Language,

History,

and Anthropology"2:IPRODUCERl-lPROCESSI IPRODUCTl. I am deliberately using general terms because they serve to remind us that the issues raised are not confined to the cinema even though this paper is. While one can find exceptions, I think that it is to say that most filmmakers present us the product and exclude the other two com to popular rhetoric as used in ponents. According reasonable

with our

culture

some

by

people

to explain

the docu

mentary, these films are produced by people striving

While I do not intendto proselytize,I should point out

everyone

GIDDENS1

They

to be

employ

and neutral, unbiased, means fair and accurate

objective. to obtain

the true facts about reality.Given that point of view, and I realize that I am oversimplifying,not to reveal the producer and only is it unnecessary the process, such revelation is counterproductive.

An earlier version of this paper was presented at the by Ben Levin for the organized Reflexivity Workshop I wish to 1977 University Film Association Meetings. Ira thank the participants of that workshop, especially I would also like to acknow Jaffe, for their comments. ledge the critical assistance of Sol Worth, Gaye Tuch Becker. man, Janis Essner, Peter Biella, and Howard 'Anthony Giddens, (NY: Basic Books,

New Rules 1976), p. 8.

of Sociological

Method

To reveal the producer is thoughtto be narcissistic, overly personal and subjective. The revelation of process isdeemed to be untidy,ugly and confusing to the audience.

To

borrow

a

concept

from

the

Johannes Fabian, "Language, History, and Anthro pology," Journal of the Philosophy of the Social Sciences 1 (1971): 19-47.

JOURNAL OF THE UNIVERSITY FILM ASSOCIATION, XXIX, 1 (Fall 1977)

3

This content downloaded from 143.106.201.36 on Thu, 28 Mar 2013 10:16:30 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Goffman3, Erving to see backstage.

sociologist supposed

are

audiences

not

illusions

It destroys

and causes them to break their suspension of disbelief. On would

the other hand, assuming a reflexive stance to reveal

be

all

three

see

components?to

- PROCESS^ things this way? IPRODUCER PRODUCT] and to suggest that unless audiences have knowledge of all three, a sophisticated and critical understanding of the product is virtually To be reflexive is to structurea product in such a way that the audience assumes that the producer, theprocess of making, and the are a coherent whole. Not only is an product aware these made audience relationships of

but theyare made to realize the necessity of that knowledge.

To be more formal about it, I would argue that being reflexivemeans that the producer deliber ately and intentionallyreveals to his audience the underlying epistemological assumptions which caused him to formulate a set of questions in a to seek answers

way,

particular

to those

questions

in a particular way, and finally to present his findings in a particular way.

There may be some confusion between reflexive and

terms which

are sometimes

producer?the be unself-conscious has

as synonyms:

and self-conscious self-reference, the while work, autobiographical the center of the work, he can self?is

autobiography, ness. In an

clearly

used

had

in his presentation. The author self-aware in the process of

to be

making the product (i.e., the autobiography), but it is possible for him to keep that knowledge private

and

simply

follow

conven

the established

tions of that genre. To be reflexive is to be not

but only self-aware, to know what aspects

to be sufficiently self-aware to reveal of self are necessary

so that an audience is able to understand both theprocess employed and the resultantproduct and to know that the revelation itself is purposive, intentional

and

not merely

narcissistic

or acciden

tally revealing.4

3Erving Goffman,

the other

is not

hand,

autobio

graphical or reflexive. It is the allegorical or metaphorical use of self, for example, Truffaut's films,400 Blows and Day for Night. The maker's life in thiswork becomes symbolic of some sortof collective?all

and

filmmakers,

perhaps

everyman.

It ispopularly assumed thatself-referenceoccurs in all art forms: as the clich? goes, an artist uses his personal experience as the basis of his art. The devotees of an art formtryto ferretout biographical tidbits so that they can discover the "hidden behind

meaning"

impossible.

on

Self-reference,

the artist's

work.

there

Again,

is

the cultural fact thatwe believe it isquite common for producers to be self-referential. What I wish to stress is that this self-referenceis distinct from reflexivity?one does not necessarily lead to the

other.

To be self-conscious in the turgidpseudo-Freudian sense of a Fellini, for example, has become a full time preoccupation particularly among the upper middle class. However, it is possible and indeed common

private

for

this

kind

for

knowledge

of

awareness

the producer,

to

remain

or at

least

to be so detached from theproduct thatall but the most devoted are discouraged from exploring the relationship between themaker and his work, and furthermore

nothing

age

words,

the producer does that exploration. In other

to encour

one

can

be

reflectivewithout being reflexive.That is,one can

become

self-conscious

without

being

conscious

of

that self-consciousness.5Only ifa producer decides tomake his awareness of selfa public matter and conveys that knowledge to his audience is it possible to regard the product as reflexive. I have just suggested that it is possible to produce autobiographies,

self-referential,

or self-conscious

works without being reflexive.Let me clarify. I am simply saying that if the work does not contain sufficientindications that the producer intendshis product to be regarded as reflexive the audience will be uncertain as to whether they are reading into the product more or other than what was

meant.6

those amorphous which we are ultimately phenomena of classifying and ordering. Perhaps, then, re self-consciousness is not merely autobiography, but the ability to see ourselves as others see us?as co capable flexive

The Presentation

of Self in Everyday

Life (GardenCity,NY: Doubleday, 1959).

4In commenting on the manuscript of this paper, Gaye Tuchman made the following comment which I believe to be both relevant and important to the distinction that to make I am trying between autobiography and may also be naively self reflexivity. "Autobiography conscious. That is one's purposive is, autobiography It assumes ordering of one's life to create coherence. coherence and so necessarily eliminates that which can not be ordered and of which the autobiographer might not even be aware. For, perhaps, we can only perceive

present subject and object, as perceiving subject and the simultaneous Such self object of others' perceptions. consciousness entails a simultaneous self necessarily involvedness and self-estrangement; a standing outside of oneself in a way that is foreign to the non-reflexive everyday self."

5See Barbara Babcock, "Reflexivity: Discriminations," paper unpublished American Anthropological Association Washington,

DC,

1977.

6Sol Worth Journal

Definitions and to the delivered at itsmeeting in

and Larry Gross, "Symbolic Strategies," 24 (Winter 1974): 27-39. of Communication

4

This content downloaded from 143.106.201.36 on Thu, 28 Mar 2013 10:16:30 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

While I am primarilyconcerned with reflexivityin the documentary film, it isnecessary tomention at least some of the general cultural manifestations of reflexiveness. I believe they,are to be found in the growing popular realization that the world, and in particular the symbolic world?things, as well as news, television, people, not what to stories?are they appear

and

events,

and

books

be. People want to know exactly what the ingre dients are before theybuy anything?aspirin, cars, television

news,

the producers:

or education.

Ralph

Nader,

no

We

longer the consumer

of what

appears

a portrait.

to be merely

In the

mirror are the reflections of two people, one of them assumed to be Van Eyck. So that the viewer will know for certain, the painter has written around the top of the mirror, "Van Eyck was here." I could trace the development of such genres

as

movies

were

the self-portrait

other

and

evidences

of

this kind of sensibilitybut itwould take us too far astray. It is sufficientto say that by the time there was

invented

already

established

trust

a minor tradition of reflexivenesswithin most

pro

pictorial

tectionmovement, truthin lendingand advertising laws are the results of this felt need. On a more profound level,we are moving away from the positivist notion thatmeaning resides in the world and human beings should strive to discover the inherent,objectively true reality of things.7This philosophy of positivism has caused many social scientists as well as documentary filmmakersand journalists to hide themselvesand theirmethods under the guise of objectivity.This point of view is challenged by both Marxists and structuralists.

communicative

forms.

Turning to the cinema,we discover that reflexivity is to be foundmore frequently in fictionfilm than in the documentary. From theirbeginnings films have been an imperfect illusion. That is, the suspension of disbelief has been broken either through accident or design. Audiences have been reminded that theyare spectators having technol ogically generated vicarious and illusionary ex periences.

In one

sense,

time

every

the camera

moves one is reminded of its presence and the construct

the

of

image.

there

Also,

is an

early

tradition in film of actors making direct contact

with

the audience.

These

"theatrical

asides"

(un

We are beginning to recognize thathuman beings constructand imposemeaning on the

doubtedly having a theatrical origin) of Groucho Marx and other comedians likeWoody Allen in

We organize a reality that ismeaningfulfor us. It is around these organizations of reality thatfilmmakers constructfilms.

However,

world.

We

create

order.

We

don't

it.

discover

Some filmmakers, like other symbol producers in our culture, are beginning to feel the need to inform their audiences about who they are and how their identitiesmay affect their films.They also wish to instruct their audiences about the from of articulation process structures ical, and cultural

the economics, and ideologies

polit sur

Annie

Hall

alienate momentarily the overall effect of both

Some

modernist

production.

exploration tinction between elements

in documentaries

are undoubt

self-awareness.

They

are also

the continuation

of a

tradition in visual forms of communication. It has been suggested that reflexivityin the visual arts begins with the cave paintings where people drew the outline of theirhand on thewall. It is the first sign of authorship. It reminds us of the process and even tells us something about the maker?most

of

the hands

reveal

missing

finger

joints.

In painting we have early examples of reflexivity in Jan Van Eyck's Giovanni Arnolfini and his Bride (1434) where we find a mirror in the center

7Gunther Stent, "Limits to the Scientific Understanding 1052-1057. 187 (1975): Science

of Man,"

move

There are three places where one finds sustained reflexive elements in fiction films: (1) Comedies in the form of satires and parodies about movies and moviemakers; (2) Dramatic films inwhich the subjectmatter ismovies and moviemakers; and (3) exploring

edly a reflectionof a general cultural concernwith

camera

ments and asides are probably not significant and hardly constructed in a manner that could be called reflexive.

rounding the documentary to the mechanics of

Reflexive

the audience.8

films which

are

concerned

of form, and parameters such as conventions disturb

the

fiction

and

with

in that the dis

non-fiction.9

From Edison toMel Brooks, fiction filmmakers have been able tomock themselvesand theirwork more parodies

than documentarians. Documentary easily are uncommon and recent in origin. For

81 am using the term "alienate" here in the sense that Brecht used it. That is, the breaking of the suspension of disbelief during a performance. See Brecht on Theatre, trans. John Willet (NY: Hill and Wang, 1964). 9It is curious that the concern with form and structure which has dominated theworks of some modernist writers, and filmmakers as well as scientists painters, musicians from physicists to anthropologists, has not interested For example, I know of no docu many documentarians. mentary filmmakers who deliberately choose uninterest in order to be able to ing and trivial subject matter concentrate on the significance of formal and structural elements

in the documentary.

JOURNAL OF THE UNIVERSITY FILM ASSOCIATION, XXIX, 1 (Fall 1977)

5

This content downloaded from 143.106.201.36 on Thu, 28 Mar 2013 10:16:30 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

example, JimMcBride's David Holzmaris Diary, Mitchell Block's No Lies; and Jim Cox's Eat the

Josh

are amazingly In Uncle similar. studio, we see a man in a theatre Jumps, sitting

when

a

Edison's

Sun.

In fact, documentary parody is so rare and out of keeping with the sensibilities of people who make these films that when a parody may exist it is regarded as confusing. In Basil Wright's review of Bu?uel's Land Without Bread Wright assumed a deliberate

ironic.

attempt

"Unfortunately,

errors and

score were

and music

that the narration not

messages inMel Brook's Blazing Saddles and in Uncle Josh Jumps, a silent one-reeler produced in

on

Bunuel's

someone

part

(presumably

to be not

Bunuel) has added to the filma wearisome Ameri can

commentary, plus the better As a result, picture symphony.

part of a Brahms never and sound

coalesce, and it is only the starkness of the pre sented

counts."10

facts which

balcony watching a movie. He ducks and cringes on

train appears

the screen.

As

each

new

scene appears he behaves as if the action were live and not on the screen.When a fight appears he jumps on stage and punches the screen fighters, thereby knocking down the screen, exposing the projector and projectionist. The filmends with the moviegoer and projectionist fighting. Both Blazing Saddles and Uncle Josh Jumps are comedies.

Because

additional

function.

they are parodies they serve an cause to be audiences They

come alienated from the suspension of disbelief

to become about their assump self-conscious tions concerning film conventions. As stated earlier, can have a reflexive function. parody

and

Whether Bunuel is, in fact, responsible for the text of the narration

the music

and

score

is unclear.11

It is sufficientfor our purposes to realize that it never

apparently

occurred

to Wright

that

some

audiences might regard thejuxtaposition ofmusic, and

narration,

images

as

being

and

ironic

may

even be a parody of travelogues and information films.

It is not difficult to see why the possibility of parody did not occur toWright. Because parody

mocks

or ridicules

communicative

forms,

conven

tions, and codes it can be said that parody has reflexive qualities. Both reflexivityand parody draw attention to the formal qualities of film as film. Most documentarians wish to make their films

transparent, records. Calling

is, to appear to the attention that

to be merely film as film

that purpose.12

frustrates

and

continues

to the present.

The

ironic

"Land Without Bread and Spanish l0Basil Wright, Tradi Earth," in Lewis Jacobs (ed.), The Documentary and Blake, tion (NY: Hopkinson 1971), p. 146. thinks that itwas Bunuel. See his Film "Roy Armes and Reality (NY: Pelican, 1974), p. 189. "Land Without is also remarkable in the way it anticipates Bread later

cinema by its triple impact. It combines de vastating images of poverty, starvation and idiocy with a dry matter of fact commentary and a musical score filled with romantic idealism." On the other hand, Barsam seems to disagree. "An an information film, even a travel film (but hardly one designed to promote tourism), Las Hurdes is an effective and disturbing record of poverty

modernist

and neglect; but as a social document, it is awkward and as mute as a faded poster despite its tragic theme." See his Non-Fiction Film (NY: Dutton, 1973), p. 83.

12Jeanne Allen, Film," Cinetracs

"Self-Reflexivity and the Documentary 1 (Summer 1977): 37-43.

these

However,

examples.

films serve not

to reveal

but to perpetuate popular cultural myths about the glamour of the stars and the industry.As William Siska suggests, "Traditional cinema does not expose the process of production to alienate us from the story that's being told; rather the lights, and

camera,

are used

technicians

as

to

icons

authenticate the notion that we are enjoying a behind the scenes look at how the industry'really

works'."13

modernist

Some Agnes tional

films

Haskell

Chinoise,

It is interestingto note that the traditionof parody in fiction films commences at the beginning of

cinema

Hollywood has produced many filmswhich deal with movies and the lives of the moviemakers: A Star is Born and Sunset Boulevard are two

Varda's

Lion's

distinctions

as

such

Wexler's Love

between

Godard's

La

Medium tend fiction

and Cool, to blur conven

and

non-fiction.

For example, inLa Chinoise, Godard (frombehind the

camera)

interrupts

Jean

Leaud's

monologue

on the role of the theatre in the revolution and if he

asks

him

but

I believe

is an actor. this

Leaud

anyway,"

and

responds, returns

"Yes, to his

speech. The audience is unable to decide whether they are hearing the sentiments of the director spoken by a character or the actor spontaneously expressing his personal feelings or an actor who shares certain ideas with thedirector and is speak ing written

lines.

Documentary actual footage

to be which purport parodies but are staged, scripted, and

acted are similar to thosefilms which mix

fictional

cause and non-fictional Both elements. to question or at least become audiences

13William Siska, "Metacinema: A Modern Necessity," paper delivered to the Society for Cinema unpublished Studies at itsmeeting in Evanston, IL, 1977. The quote is from p. 3.

6

This content downloaded from 143.106.201.36 on Thu, 28 Mar 2013 10:16:30 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

confused

about

their assumptions

concerning

fiction and documentary and ultimately,I

suppose,

about

their assumptions

In

reality.

that sense, theyproduce audience selfcon sciousness

and

have

reflexive

qualities.

Examining the history of the documentary, we discover that it is to theRussians in the 20s and 30s and the French in the 50s and 60s thatwe must look for the true origins of documentary reflexivity.14

Taken

together,

Jean

Rouen's

film,

Chronicle of A Summer, and Dziga Vertov's A Man With A Movie Camera raise most of the significant issues. In the 1920s Vertov, an artist and founder of the Russian documentary, developed a theoryof film in opposition to thatof Eisenstein. Vertov argued that the role of film in a revolutionary society should be to raise the consciousness of the aud ience by creating a film formwhich caused them to see theworld in termsof a dialectical material ism. The Kino Eye (the camera eye) would pro duce Kino Pravda?Cine Truth. For Vertov the artificesof fictionproduced enter tainment?escape

and

fantasies.

Revolutionary

filmmakers should take pictures of actuality?the everyday events of ordinary people. This raw stuff of lifecould thenbe transformed intomeaningful statements. In his film,A Man With A Movie Camera, Vertov attempted to explicate his theory.15

He was more concerned with revealing process than with revealing self. Vertov wished the aud

ience

to understand

ical,

technical, He

forms lecture of the

early 19th century. They constitute an unstudied form of the cinema and have been overlooked by most histories the film. However, of documentary they do contain earliest evidence of reflexive elements in non-fiction film. frequently employ first person narrations to themselves as authors and the process they used the film. Inmany cases, these films are primarily

The makers describe tomake

about the making of the film and thereby cause the films themselves to become the object of the audience's atten tion. However, like the traditional fiction films about

the apparent reflexiveness of movies and moviemakers, these films is partially based on the assumed difficulties of production and the heroic acts performed by the makers in the process of getting the footage. These films do not lead an audience to a sophisticated understanding

of film as communication, rather they cause them to to marvel at the mysterious wonders of the continue intrepid adventurer-filmmakers. 15See "The Vertov 1972): 46-51.

Papers,"

Film

Comment

8 (Spring

also

wanted

to know

audiences

that

filmmaking iswork and the filmmakera worker, a very important justification for art in Leninist Russia. We see the filmmaker but he ismore a part of the process than anything else. One of Vertov's major goals was to aid the audience in theirunderstanding of the process of construction in film so that they could develop a sophisticated and critical attitude. Vertov saw this raisingof the visual consciousness of audiences as the way to bring Marxist truth to themasses. Like Godard (who at one point founded a Dziga Vertov film collective), Vertov wished to make revolutionary filmswhich intentionallytaughtaudiences how to see the world in a differentway. To locate it in modern terminology,16 Vertov is suggestingthat in order to be able to make the assumption of in tentionand then tomake inferencesviewersmust have ledge

structural

that is, have know to related conventions

competence; of the socio-cultural inferences

making

of meaning

in filmic sign-events.

Rouch,17 a French anthropologist engaged infield work inWest Africa sinceWorld War II, is one of the few anthropologists concerned with creat ing a cinematic formwhich is peculiarly appro priate for anthropological expression. His film, Chronicle ofA Summer, representsan experiment to find that form.Rouch is primarily concerned with the personal: the philosophical problems of doing research and the possible effectsof filming research.

He

is also

in form. But

interested

ques

tions about the formal aspects of structurecome from his concern with the selfmore than from

Both lecture

film works, in mechan as con as well

methodological

ceptual ways, thereby demystifying the creative process.

concern

Vertov's

illustrated 14Iam excluding from consideration films. These cinematic and adventurer/travelogue In fact, the illustrated predate the documentary. film finds its origins in the lantern slide lecture

how

century

were

films

pioneering

work

the process.

with ahead

of

to wait

had

to come

for Rouch

their almost along

time.

Vertov's

a quarter of a before someone

would pursue the questions raised with A Man With A Movie Camera. Rouch has said that he sees his own filmsas being an attempt to combine the personal

and

concerns

participatory

of Robert

Flaherty with an interest in process derived from Vertov. As we know, Morin described Chronicle of A Summer as being cinema v?rit? in emulation of Vertov's kino pravda. Rouch's influence in France

has

been

extensive.

In the USA,

however,

his films are seldom seen and his work confused with such American Direct Cinema people as Leacock,

and

Pennebaker,

16See Worth

and Gross,

the Maysles.

cited above.

17See Jean Rouch, "The Camera and theMan," in the Anthropology of Visual Communication (1974): 37-44.

JOURNAL OF THE UNIVERSITY FILM ASSOCIATION, XXIX, 1 (Fall 1977)

7

This content downloaded from 143.106.201.36 on Thu, 28 Mar 2013 10:16:30 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Studies 1, no.l

Rouen's films signaled the beginning of a tech some documen that caused revolution nological to face several issues. tarians fundamental

Prior to the mid-1960s film technology was obtrusive and limited the type offilming possible. The advent of lightweightportable sync sound equipment made itfeasible for filmmakers tofollow people around and film virtually anywhere; to intrude on people's lives?observe them and participate in their activities.

Documentarians

found

themselves

confronted with problems similar to those of ethnographers and otherfield workers.18 some it became necessary to rethink the epistemological, moral, and political structures thatmade the documentary possible. They began to grapple with such questions as:

For

(1) Ifdocumentarians claimed that theywere trying to film people as they would have behaved if theywere not being filmed, how could they account for the presence of the camera and crew and the modifications it caused?

(2) On what basis can filmmakers justify their intrusion into the lives of the people theyfilm? (3) Given the mandate of objectivity how could the filmmaker convey his feelings as well as his understanding of the people he filmed and about the subject of the film? (4) What are the ideological implications of documentary film?

last

ten

a

with

years

new

because

urgency

of

several factors: 1) the potential created by thenew technology; 2) a general shiftinour society toward self-awareness; 3) the influence of university ed on

ucation

filmmakers

young

more

(i.e.,

docu

mentarians received social science training); and 4) the effectof television news and documentary. The desire to explore the capacities of this equipment and the self-awareness itproduced created a need for new methods and forms of expression. Feeling equally uncomfortable with selfreferentiality(where the self becomes submerged intometaphor) and with the apparent impersonality of traditional documen tary (where the expression of self is deemed improper), some filmmakers found new ways to explore themselves, theirworld, and in a real

very

sense,

cinema

itself

have

They

confronted these questions by exposing them in the same

selves

One

way

they expose

manifestation?the

particular

others.

development

of non-fiction films dealing with the filmmakers' own family and their immediate world seems to represent a non-fiction genre which fits neither the traditional definition of the documentary nor the personal art film. In fact, these films violate canons

of both

genres.

The documentary filmwas founded on thewestern middle class need to explore, document, explain, understand and hence symbolically control the It has

world. less,

been

what

the

pressed

"We"

do

to "Them."

The

are usually and disadvantaged,

in this case

"Them"

and

oppressed.

the poor, the power the politically sup films dealing Documentary

with the richand powerful or even themiddle class are as sparse

as social

science

studies

of these people.

(5) What obligations does thefilmmakerhave to his audience?19

The documentaryfilm has not been a place where

While thesequestions are obviously not new?the social documentarians of the 1930s grappled with many of them?they have been raised again in the

To find this subject matter one must look at the experimental, avant garde filmmakersor thehome movie. In fact, film artists like Jonas Mekas in the treatment of his life entitledNotes, Diaries, and Sketches and Stan Brakhage in Window Water Baby Moving, have developed a deliberate aesthetic from the conventions of the home movie in much the same way as Lee Friedlander and Diane Arbus created a snapshot aesthetic in art

of lightweight equipment and ,8"With the development the growth of an aesthetic of direct cinema, the ethical to the of the filmmaker problem of the relationship .... Re people in their films became more amorphous gardless of whether consent is flawed on such grounds as

intimidation or deceit, a fundamental ethical difficulty in direct cinema is that when we use people in a sequence we put them at risk without sufficiently informing them of potential hazards." Calvin Pryluck, "Ultimately We Are All Outsiders: The Ethics of Documentary Film," Journal of the University Film Association 28 (Winter are from pp. 21 and 29. 1976): 21-29; the quotations l9James M. mentary,"

in Docu Linton, "The Moral Dimension Journal of the University Film Association

28 (Spring 1976): 17-22.

people

explored

themselves

or

their own

culture.

photography. Until recently the division was relatively clear. If you wanted tomake films about people exotic to your

own

experience

you made

documentaries,

and ifyou wished to explore yourself, your feel ings and the known world around you, you made personal art films. Recently a number of films have appeared which confuse this taxonomy. They are filmswhich deal with the filmmakers' family and culture. In subject matter, they violate the norms of traditional documentary in that they

8

This content downloaded from 143.106.201.36 on Thu, 28 Mar 2013 10:16:30 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

overtly deal in an involved way with a personal interestof the filmmakers.Because many of these filmmakers come from a documentary tradition theydo not employ theconventions of thepersonal art film, rather theyuse a documentary style. In otherwords, theyhave the look of a documentary even though the subject matter is exotic to the genre. Examples of these films would include Jerome Hill's autobiography Portrait; Miriam Weinstein's Living With Peter; Amalie Rothchild's Nan?, Mom, andMe; and JeffKreine's The Plaint of Steve Kreines As Told By His Younger Brother

Jeff

it is obviously impossible to reveal the producer and not the process, it is possible to concentrate on one and only incidentallydeal with the other. Most of these filmmakers share with Rouch a primary concern with self as maker and person and make that quest dominate theirfilms.

While

It is in other types of films thatwe see a concern with the revelation of process emerge.This interest seems to come from twomain sources: 1)politic ally committed filmmakerswho, like Vertov and Godard, are interested in the ideological implica tions of filmform?for example David Rothberg's My Friend Vince; and 2) filmmakers who seek validation for theirwork within social science and feel

consequently,

the

need

and justifytheirmethodologies?for Asch's Ax Fight. there

Finally,

are

a

number

of

to

articulate

example Tim

Direct

Cinema

films,

such

as

documentaries

Don't

Pennebajcer's

Look Back and theCanadian Film Board's Lonely Boy, are filledwith what was considered at the to be "accidents"?that

is, shots which

were

out of focus, shotswhere themike and /or sound

in the frame, etc. Very soon person appeared "accidents" became signs of direct cinema

these style,

an indication that thedirector did not control the event

he was

recording.

Audiences

appeared

and Faces love.

Other films such as Mike Rubio's Sad Song of Yellow Skin and Waiting for Fidel and theMays les' Grey

the

Gardens

signs as camera jiggle, graininess, for example, John Cassavettes' or the battle scenes in Kubrick's Dr. Strange to verifying In addition the "uncontrolled" cinema

bad

aesthetic

focus:

of direct

cinema

as a recorder

of actual

and

subject

contain

crew

and

interactions

other

between

be

"backstage"

haviors which provide audiences with information about

the producers

and

process.

It would appear that these apparently reflexive are

an

again

accident

of

the moment:

an unexpected turn of events during the shooting rather than the result of deliberate pre-production planning.What is interestingand does representa departure from documentary conventions is that these "accidents" are allowed to remain in the final version of the film. It seems that thesefilmmakers acquired footage which had a particular "look" and which could not be cut in traditionalways. I would argue that it was primarily out of a professional need for a finished product rather than an interest in the question of reflexivity that motivated them to include those elements which cause these films to appear reflexive. For example, "big" Edie and "little" Edie Beale would not

ignore

the presence

of the camera

and

crew,

that is, learn to behave as "proper" subjects of a documentary film. In spite of this situation (or possibly because of it), the Maysles decided to continue and make Grey Gardens even though it has the "look" which is differentfrom theirother films. In one sense, the Maysles were allowing the circumstances of the shooting to dictate the form of the film and consequently revealed the and

process

producer.

In contrast to these filmsof "accident" reflexivity,

there

does

the outset

a project which was designed at to explore the consequences of docu

exist

the explorations of Rouch and Vertov. Hubert a filmmaker, an and Malcolm Smith, Shuman,

anthropologist, are presently in the field filming an ethnography

of some Mexican

Indians.

Accord

ing to theirproposal, "The principal strategyto be undertaken by thisproject is to investethnographic material in film with additional self-conscious components?the

field

investigators,

their actions,

personalities,methods, and theirdealings with an advisory panel of colleagues."21 They intend to

to

believe in them so much as a validating device that fiction filmmakerswho wished to increase verisimilitude in their filmsbegan to employ such direct

the film crew.

mentary and enthnographic reflexivity.To my knowledge it is the firstAmerican film to continue

which contain reflexiveelements which appear to be present througTiaccident rather than design.

time

of

presence

elements

These filmmakershave created an autobiograph ical and family genre which cannot be comfort ably fit into either theart filmor thedocumentary. This creation which employs elements from both genres has the effectof making us self-conscious about our expectations. In addition, these films are clearly self-consciously produced and often quite overtly reflexive.

who,

ity20these elements serve to remind audiences of the process of filmmaking and, of course, the

20See Stephen Mamber, Cinema Verite in America: in Uncontrolled Documentary (Cambridge, MA:

Studies

MIT,

1974).

21 Hubert

Yucatec Maya: Alle Smith, "Contemporary to Ethnography gory through a Self-Conscious Approach and Ethnographic submitted to the Film," a proposal National Endowment for the Humanities.

JOURNAL OF THE UNIVERSITY FILM ASSOCIATION, XXIX, 1 (Fall 1977)

9

This content downloaded from 143.106.201.36 on Thu, 28 Mar 2013 10:16:30 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

accomplish this task by: 1) filming the Indians in a context which includes the observers; 2) filming the field team and the Indians inmutual socializa tion; 3) filming thefield team as they interactwith each other and with the advisory panel.22 In addition to the films they produce, theywill provide "a written body of field-relatedmethods for investing non-fiction filmswith internal self statements

conscious

I mention

of procedure."23

Smith's project now even though it isnot complete and its significance difficult to assess because it a

represents

step

a

toward

reflexive

truly

docu

mentary cinema. Whatever else these films may be, theywill have been intentionallyreflexivefrom their inception.They will provide us with a chance to compare

"accidental"

and

"deliberate"

docu

mentary reflexivity.

has been explored by social scientists and other scholars for some time and that there is an exten sive

literature.24

dentally"

In fact, a number

of

the arguments

sented here appear contradictory.

an

elite

show

how

these

concerns

have

been

transformed

At the same time I have said thatmost documen tary reflexiveness

has

been

more

accidental

filmmakers

have

used

reflexive

ele

ments in theirfilms (or at leasthave been regarded by some audiences as being reflexive) without really intending to do so or at least without examining the implications.Further, Iwould argue that based upon my examination of these films, published interviewswith the filmmakers, and personal

conversations

and

correspondence,

these

filmmakers appear to lack a sufficientlysophis ticated philosophical, moral, aesthetic or scientific motivation for a rigorous exploration of the con sequences of reflexivityfor documentary cinema. They seem oblivious to the fact that reflexivity

22The advising in panel consists of four specialists Indian anthropology (one member is Indian by birth and an anthropologist three visual anthro by profession), of social science. pologists, and a philosopher 23Smith proposal,

cited above.

the

elements

are

regarded

as nar

in-group.

To be reflexive is to reveal thatfilms?all films, whether theyare labeledfiction, or

art?are

created

structured

articulations of thefilmmaker and not authentic truthfulobjective records.

Sooner or later the documentar?an is going to have to face thepossibility of assuming the socially diminished role of interpreterof the world and will no longerbe regarded as an objective recorder of reality. If this is the case then it is not too difficult to see why these filmmakersare reluctant to explore the idea.

than

deliberate. In effect,I have been arguing that some documentary

reflexive

documentary,

by a general increase inpublic self-awarenessand by the technological changes which occurred in filmmaking in the 1960s.

of

The contradiction can be phrased in the formof a question: Why haven't more documentary film makers explored the implications of reflexivity when reflexive elements crop up in their films? To adequately explore thisquestion would require a lengthydiscussion of complicated issues such as the cultural role of the documentary or the adequacy of the concepts of objectivity and sub jectivity for the documentary, etc. However, I would like to present what I believe to be the kernel of the issue:

pre

On the one hand, I have generated a definition of reflexivenesswhich situates some recent docu mentary filmswithin a tradition in thevisual arts, a tradition in which the producer is publically concerned with the relationship between self,pro cess, and product. In addition, I have tried to

some

consequence,

cissistic, superficial, self-indulgentor appealing to

One could argue that the idea of "accidental" reflexiveness is a contradiction in termsand that reflexivitydepends on intentionalityand deliber ateness.

a

As

filmsmentioned above which contain these "acci

My intention here was to restrainmy obvious partianship. Clearly, I have failed to do so. I should now like to conclude by suggesting that documentary filmmakershave a social obligation to not be objective. The concept was inapprop riately

borrowed

from

the natural

sciences?an

idea which has little support from the social sciences. Both social scientists and documentary filmmakersare interpretersof theworld. As Sue Ellen Jacobs has put it, "Perhaps the best thing we can learn from anthropological writings" (and I would add films and photographs) "is how

see Bob Sch?lte, "Toward a Reflexive 24For example, and Critical Anthropology," in Dell Hymes (ed.), Rein venting Anthropology House, (NY: Random 1972), pp. 430-458.

10

This content downloaded from 143.106.201.36 on Thu, 28 Mar 2013 10:16:30 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

who call themselves people the world of others."25 To

see

'anthropologists' ourselves present

Reflexivity offers instruct our

and

our products as anything else is to fostera danger

ous

false

on

consciousness

the part

of our

us

a means

audiences

world.

aud

"We

study man,

that

ourselves because

25Quoted in Simeon W. Chilungi, "Issues in the Ethics of Research Method: An Interpretation of the Anglo American Perspective," Current Anthropology 17, no. 3:

A member

and Professor

died Monday,

29,

is the problem."26

in Question," "Anthropology the quote is from p. 408.

1977, in Boston,

of the Annenberg School faculty for 17 years, he taught courses in documentary film production and visual laboratories. and was chairperson of the School's undergraduate program and director of the media

communications,

A native of New York City, Sol worked from 1946-63 as partner, chief photographer and creative vice president of Goold Studios, Inc. His film Teatteri was cited at the Berlin and Cannes film festivals of 1958 and was added to the permanent collection

of documentary

films at the Museum

Sol's writing concentrated on the anthropological semiology of film, and his text Through Navajo adapted to the making of a film. A

of Modern

Art

in New

study of film. His Eyes

(co-authored

York

City.

articles were

some of the earliest probes explored how Navajo

with John Adair)

into the indians

Sol served as president of the Society for the Anthropology of Association, Anthropological Communication. Visual and as editor (1973-76) of its journal Studies in the Anthropology of

fellow of the American

Visual

Communication

the

reflect on we must,

at the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg School of where he was attending the annual Flaherty seminar.

of Communications

August

is, we

because

1922-1977

SOL WORTH

filmmaker

others, studying man in civilization

26Stanley Diamond, Hymes, pp. 401-429;

469.

Sol Worth,

can

process of producing statements about the

iences.

Communications,

we whereby to understand

As a practitioner/ theoretician, Sol Worth served as a model for future filmmakers and teachers. His memory will continue to enrich the study and production of films in the academic community.

JOURNAL OF THE UNIVERSITY FILM ASSOCIATION, XXIX, 1 (Fall 1977)

This content downloaded from 143.106.201.36 on Thu, 28 Mar 2013 10:16:30 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

in