2. A Post Modern assessment of
Representation through
Documentary
• Documentaries, like photography, must be considered a
representational medium. They signify the truth; yet the truth is not
as innocent as it may seem.
• Documentaries portray a version of the truth, presented by the
creator directly to the viewer. The viewer is drawn into a reality that
seemingly does not need questioning, and the viewer experiences
co presence in being in the now, looking at the image, yet also
there, looking at what the image represents.
• The lens of the camera is in effect the eye of the viewer, and they
are in effect there.
3. Applying this to The Art of
Artistry
• We tried to allow our viewers to determine their own perception
of creativity through ensuring that our viewers feel as though
they are personally experiencing the events through the camera
lens. The interviews give a very personal insight into the expert’s
viewpoints, and we achieved this with particular success as we
kept the shots simple (or organic), and the surroundings objects
plain. Therefore, we attempted to avoid channeling the audience
to our own perception, and instead aided them to create their
own. By ‘simple’ this relates to our own preferred reading (Hall)
and therefore we may still have influenced viewers.
• Despite this, it is an unavoidable fact that we presented our own
version of the ‘truth’ and we hope that the audience can make the
distinction between our perception of reality and reality. This will
be explored further in question 3, determining audience feedback
and reaction.
4. Theory cont.
• Despite their presentation, documentaries are
not an objective but a subjective device, a
medium that marshall[s] systems of
representation to encourage a point of view
about something.
• Bauldrillard argues that a documentary is a
representation of what reality once was, and
not what it is. Furthermore it is made in the eyes
of the creator.
Studies in Documentary
Film
Volume 4, Issue 1, 2010
5. Applying this
• The subjectivity comes from who we chose to interview, and therefore
this represents our perceptions about what a creative job entails.
However, we successfully interviewed a range of people who may not
have a creative job, yet have an educated view about what creativity is. To
contrast this, we also included two artists who do have a conventional
creative involvement in their lifestyle. This is a success for us, however we
could have made it clearer within the documentary that we wish to
challenge audience perceptions of creative jobs.
• We did construct or medialise shots within our production. For example,
when interviewing Paul Bennett we chose to represent him as relaxing in
a vibrant cafe - this is totally constructed yet begins to shape and form
audience impressions of him acting as a laid back and socially person
when in reality they gain no knowledge of his true nature - they see the
view we portray.
• However, whilst we may have shaped ideas of the audience we did make
it clear that the documentary was a construct by breaking the 4th rule and
showing a director (Sebastian Dewhirst) and camera equipment within
the production. This is an example of our postmodern style.
6. Creativity Theory
• Everyone has a differing opinion on creativity, and has a different
interpretation of what it means.
• David Gauntlett says ‘making is connecting’ i.e when you make products
you are more likely to connect with other people as you want to share what
you have made. Therefore, in relation to his appearance in the production
and when taking a theoretical view of the production we must consider
this more deeply. As filmmakers we are a living example of this - we made
our video and then a viewers watched it we connected to them.
Furthermore, it was the creativity of the interviewee’s that led to our
contacting of them and proceeding interviews. If it were not for their own
creativity we may not have connected with them.
• Jones says ‘a process needed for problem solving’ - our problem being our
own struggle to grasp the true meaning of creativity itself. In order to solve
this, we explored the question throughout our documentary.
7. Creat. Theory cont.
Abra interprets that creativity is ‘ the achieving of tangible products
such as works of art’ - we actually contested this opinion with our
production itself. Unless we burn a copy on a cd whereby it will
become a tangible product, our production would not have been
viewed as creative by Abra. Furthermore, within our production this is
clear. Artists Paul Bennett and Judith Lawrence create tangible works
of art that can be deemed as creative - but we would argue that Toby
Mores is just as creative with his company ‘Sleepy Dogs’ who involve
themselves in creative marketing techniques for media productions.
8. In conclusion… How did
we do?
• In making our production we have connected with people, the
viewers, and also we have been able to interact with them to gauge
audience reception - this is a success.
• As Jones argues, our production did act as a process for problem
solving – we wished to discover what creativity can mean and the
differing ways in which it can be used. This is a success.
• Our product in itself is a creative piece of art, yet it cannot be
touched or felt. Therefore, we have demonstrated that creativity can
be viewed in different ways – we would certainly argue that our
production has had a lot of creative and unique input! This is a point
that we did prove, but we could have more implicitly shown within
our production. which it can be used in life.
