This document discusses six modes of representation in documentary filmmaking: poetic, expository, participatory, observational, reflexive, and performative. It provides an overview of each mode, including how they arose and their distinguishing characteristics. The poetic mode prioritizes mood, tone, and affect over presenting facts or arguments. It draws on the historical world but transforms the material in distinctive ways to create poetic impressions. The modes do not represent an evolutionary chain, and newer modes are not necessarily better, but offer different ways of representing reality.

1. n
videsthefinal,distinguishingelementof documentary.Theexhibitorof at-
tractions,the tellerof stories,andthe poetof photog1niecondensein the
figureof the documentaryfilmmakeras orator,speakingin a voiceall his
ownabouta worldwe allshare.
Theseelementsfirstcametogetherin the soviet Unionthroughthe
1920sas the challengeof constructinga newsocietytookprecedencein
allthearts.Thisparticularmeldingof elementstookrootinothercountries
inthelate1920sandearly1930sas governments,thankstoadvocateslike
JohnGrierson,sawthe valueof usingfilmto promotea senseof partici-
patorycitizenshipandto supportthe rolein governmentin confrontingthe
mostdifficultissuesof theday,suchas inflation,poverty,andthe Depres-
sion.Answersto theseproblemsvariedwidelyfromdemocraticBritainto
fascistGermanyandfroma NewDealUnitedstatesto a communistRus-
sia,butineachcase,thevoiceofthedocumentariancontributedsignificantly
to framinga nationalagendaand proposingcoursesof action.
Chapter6
WhatTypesof Documentary
AreThere?
GROUPING THE MANY VOICES
OF DOCUMENTARY
I verydocumentaryhas its own distinctvoice.Likeeveryspeakingvoice,
r)verycinematicvoicehasa styleor "grain"all itsownthatactslikea sig-
rr;rtureor fingerprint.lt atteststo the individualityof thefilmmakeror direc-
l()ror,sometimes,to thedeterminingpowerof a sponsoror controllingor-
,vrrnization.Televisionnewshasa voiceof itsownjustas Fredwisemanor
t;hrisMarker,EstherShubor MarinaGoldovskayadoes.
lndividualvoiceslendthemselvesto an auteurtheoryof cinema,while
,lraredvoiceslendthemselvesto a genretheoryof cinema.Genrestudy
, onsidersthequalitiesthatcharacterizevariousgroupingsof filmmakers
'rndfilms.Indocumentaryfilmandvideo,wecanidentifysixmodesof rep-
r('sentationthatfunctionsomethinglikesub-genresof the documentary
lrlrngenreitself:poetic,expository,participatory,observational,reflexive,
l,crformative.
Thesesixmodesestablisha looseframeworkof affiliationwithinwhich
rrrrlividualsmaywork;theyset up conventionsthata givenfilmmayadopt;
rrrl th€! providespecificexpectationsviewersanticipatehavingfulfilled.
I ,rr;hmodepossessesexamplesthatwecanidentifyasprototypesormod-
'III I INTRODUCTION TO DOCUMENTARY
Nichols, Bill, Introduction to Documentary.
Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2001.

2. The orderof presentationforthc..;r-.six rnodescorrespondsroughryto
thechronologyof theirintroduction.rtmaythereforeseemto providea his-
tory of documentaryfirm,but it doesso onryimperfecily.A firmidentified
with a givenmode neednot be so entirery.A refrexivedocumentarycan
containsizabreportionsof observationaror participatoryfootage;an ex-
positorydocumentarycan incrudepoeticor performativesegmients.The
characteristicsof a givenmodefunctionas a dominantinagivenfirm:they
grvestructureto theoverallfilm,buttheydo notdictateor determrneevery
aspectof itsorganization.considerabreratituderemainspossibre.
A morerecentfirmneednothavea morerecentmodeas itsdominant.
Itcanreverttoanearriermodewhirestiilincrudingerementsofratermodes.
A performativedocumentarycan exhibitmanyquaritiesof a poeticdocu,
mentary,for exampre.The modesdo not representan evorutionarychain
in whichlatermodesdemonstratesuperiorityoverearrieronesano van-
quishthem.once estabrishedthrougha set of conventionsand paradig-
maticfirms,a givenmoderemainsavairabreto ail.Expositorydocumen-
tary,for example,goes backto the 1920sbut remainshighryinfruential
today.MosttelevisionnewsandrearityTVshowsdependheaviryonitsquite
datedconventions,as doarmostailscienceandnaturedocumentaries,bi_
ographiessuchas rheA&E Biographyseries,and the majorityof rarge-
scalehistoricardocumentariessuchas Thecivirwar (19g0),Eyeson the
Prize(1987,1990), TheAmericancinema(1994),or Thepeopte,scentury
(1ee8).
To someextent,eachmodeof documentaryrepresentationarisesin
partthrougha growingsenseof dissatisfactionamongfilmmakerswitha
previousmode.Inthissensethe modesdo conveysomesenseof a doc_
umentaryhistory.Theobservationarmodeof representationarose,in part,
fromtheavairabirityof mobire16mmcamerasandmagnetictaperecorders
in the 1960s.Poeticdocumentarysuddenryseemedtoo abstractand ex-
positorydocumentarytoodidacticwhenitnowprovedpossibretofirmevery_
oayeventswithminimalstagingor intervention.
observationwas necessariryrimitedto the presentmomentas firm-
makersrecordedwhathappenedbeforethem.But observationshareda
trait,or convention,withpoeticand expositorymodesof representation:
it,too,camoufragedtheactuarpresenceandshapinginfruenceof thefirm-
maker.Participatorydocumentarytookshapewithrherealizationthatfilm_
maKersneed not disguisetheircrosererationshipwith theirsublectsby
1OO I INTRODUCTION TO DOCUMENTARY
l,'llrrrtl l;l9tt{):; ()t r)l) .r!tvttt{l rvr'ttl:' llrlrl l;rlcttttltl lrt ot;t;ttt :r:; tl llrr:y wcttl tttll
ll l('t o
lrrlcrtitlcsirrN;rrrooAlorcxlttttple,telluSthatNanookandhisfamilyface
,t.rrvalionifthis-qrcirllrrrrrLcrof thenorthcannotfindfood,buttheydo not
t,'llus what Flahertyhimsellate or whetherhe madefoodavailableto
Il,rrrook.Flahertyasksusto suspendourdisbeliefinthefictionalaspectof
r,r,,storyat thepriceof a certaindishonestyinwhathe revealsto us about
trr,,actualrelationto hissubject.WithfilmmakerslikeJeanRouch(Chron-
r,lr:of a Summer,1960),Nick Broomfield(Ihe Aileen WourmosStory,
t' t92),Kazuo Hara (The Emperor'sNakedArmy Marches On, 1987), and
lrrrrSilver(Watsonvitteon Strike,1989)whathappensbecauseof thefilm-
rrr;rker'spresencebecomesascrucialasanythingthathappensdespltehis
I't()sence.
Thedesiretocomeupwithdifferentwaysof representingtheworldcon-
tll)utesto theformationof eachmode,as doesa changingsetof circum-
,tirnces.Newmodesarisepartlyin responseto perceiveddeficienciesin
prr:viorJsones,butthe perceptionof deficiencycomesaboutpartlyfroma
',,)nseofwhatittakesto representthehistoricalworldfroma particularper-
',pectiveat a givenmomentintime.Theseemingneutralityand"makeof it
wlratyouwill"qualityof observationalcinemaaroseat theendof thequiet
lrlliesandduringtheheydayof descriptive,observation-basedformsofso-
, rolog!.lt flourishedin partas theembodimentof a presumed"endof ide-
,,logy"and a fascinationwith the everydayworld,but not necessarilyof
rlfinitywiththesocialplightor politicalangerofthosewhooccupythemar-
r;rnsof society.
Similarly,theemotionalintensityandsubjectiveexpressivenessof per-
l()rmativedocumentarytookshapeinthe1980sand1990s.lttookstrongest
rootamongthosegroupswhosesenseof commonalityhadgrownduring
tlrisperiodas a resultof an identitypoliticsthat affirmedthe relativeau-
tonomyand socialdistinctivenessof marginalizedgroups.Thesefilmsre-
rrrctedtechniquessuch as the voice-of-Godcommentarynot becauseit
lackedhumilitybutbecauseit belongedto an entireepistemology,or way
of seeingand knowingtheworld,no longerdeemedacceptable.
We do wellto takewitha grainof saltanyclaimsthata newmodead-
vancesthe art of cinemaand capturesaspectsof the worldneverbefore
lrossible.Whatchangesisthemodeof representation,notthequalityor ul-
limatestatusof the representation.A newmodeis notso muchbetteras it
rsdifferent,eventhoughtheideaof "improvement"isfrequentlytouted,es-
peciallyamongchampionsand practitionersof a newmode.A newmode
carriesa differentsetof emphasesandimplications.ltwilleventuallyprove
vulnerable,in turn,to criticismfor limitationsthatyetanothermodeof rep-
WhatTypes of DocumentaryAre There? | 101

3. !!u ,r*
atjerTriniU(JonEtse,1980)photo
courtesyofJonElse
Post-'60sreconsiderationsol ColdWarrhetoricinvitedarevisionoflhepostwarrecord
FilmmakerssuchasConnieFieldin TheLie
yd_linesofRosietheBiveterandJohnElsei1
lne
naltafterTrinityrecircutatehistoricai
tootageinanewcontextInthrscase,Elsere_
:liiirg:
RoberrJ 0ppenheimershesirancies
anddoubtsaboutthedeveiopmentottheatomic
?omn
asalost,orsuppressed.vojceofreason
:rlnq.,
periodolnear_hysteriaOppenheimer
nrmsellwasaccusedollreasorr
srre.sto preoccupyan audience.
i3i:$:ffi,'!lih',ij"l"-"Ji,iill;T:: r:,:: signarIessabetterwaytorepresentthehistoricalworldtnana new;;;"""
Drgrrarlessa betterwayto
ideologyto explainour rerefi^nr^ F^^,ir.,
ntnanttoorganizea film,a newideologyto explainour r"rrti^"l^ ;^:;::."-"i'rrl
ranlIoorganizea film,a nevl
siresro preoccupv
""
:l:,:t:"":
to realitv'and a new
"J;;
;J;; and de-
We can nowsaya bitmoreabouteachof themodesin turn.
THE POETIC MODE
As we saw in chapter 4, poeticdocumentarysharesa commonterrain
Ti':1ffi ;ffi,x;.i*1t5$:1"'oo"l,l,,l,*"'*"conven.
illi',:fi,llil?lfffir'n'";"il"::,:J:ifi:""11,",jff:Hl,il"H:takeon the fufl_bloooed rs. Socialactorsseldom
anda fixedviewof theu
rsychologicalcomplexity
otherobject.u. 1."*,"
llyfunctionon a parwith
sociationsandparternsjl,l",icho_osins.*" n",?:,*X:|ruililg;'ir,l:;:cialactorsin Jorisrvens'sRain(1gzg))i,'iorexampre,
butwedo cometo
102 I INTRODUCTION
TO DOCUMENTARY
;rltprr-.ciitlr-.lltolyil(;lntl)tr!:,,,t()ttlvrtttst:rc;ttt):;tll tt l;tttlttltttr:;ltowtltltrt:;l;
nlgovorArrtsturrlirrrr
Thepoeticrnorkrr; purticularlyadeptatopeningupthepossibilityof al-
tcrnativeformsof knowledgeto thestraightforwardtransferof information,
theprosecutionof a particularargumentor pointof view,or the presenta-
tionof reasonedpropositionsaboutproblemsinneedofsolution'Thismode
stressesmood,tone,andaffectmuchmorethandisplaysof knowledgeor
actsof persuasion.The rhetoricalelementremainsunderdeveloped.
LaszloMoholy-Nagy'sPlayof Light:Black,White,Grey(1930),for ex-
ample,presentsvariousviewsof oneof hisown kineticsculpturesto em-
phasizethegradationsof lightpassingacrossthefilmframeratherthanto
documentthe materialshapeof the sculptureitself.The effectof thisplay
of lighton theviewertakeson moreimportancethantheobjectit refersto
inthehistoricalworld.Similarly,JeanMitry'sPacific231 (1944)is in parta
homagetoAbelGance'sLa Roueandinparta poeticevocationofthepower
andspeedof a steamlocomotiveas it graduallybuildsup speedand hur-
tlestowardits (unspecified)destination.The editingstressesrhythmand
formmorethanit detailstheactualworkingsof a locomotive.
The documentarydimensionto the poetic mode of representation
stemslargelyfromthedegreeto whichmodernistfilmsrelyon the histori-
calworldfortheirsourcematerial.Someavant-gardefilmssuchas Oscar
Fischinger'sCompositionin Blue (1935)use abstractpatternsof form or
coloror animatedfiguresand haveminimalrelationto a documentarytra-
ditionof representingfhehistoricalworldratherthana worldof theartist's
imagining.Poeticdocumentaries,though,drawon the historicalworldfor
theirraw materialbut transformthis materialin distinctiveways.Francis
Thompson'sN.Y.,N.Y.(1957),for example,usesshotsof NewYorkCity
thatprovideevidenceof how NewYorklookedin the mid-1950sbutgives
greaterpriorityto howtheseshotscan be selectedand arrangedto pro-
ducea poeticimpressionof thecityas a massof volume,color,andmove-
ment.Thompson'sfilmcontinuesthetraditionofthecitysymphonyfilmand
affirmsthepoeticpotentialofdocumentaryto seethehistoricalworldanew.
The poeticmodebeganin tandemwithmodernismas a wayof repre-
sentingrealityintermsof a seriesoffragments,subjectiveimpressions,in-
coherentacts,andlooseassociations.Thesequalitieswereoftenattributed
tothetransformationsof industrializationgenerallyandtheeffectsofWorld
War I in particular.The modernisteventno longerseemedto makesense
in traditionalnarrative,realistterms.Breakingup timeandspaceintomul-
tipleperspectives,denyingcoherenceto personalitiesvulnerableto erup-
tionsfrom the unconscious,and refusingto providesolutionsto insur-
mountableproblemshadthesenseofan honestyaboutitevenasitcreated
WhatTypes of DocumentaryAreThere? | 103

4. worksofartthatwere
,puzznng
orambiguousintheireffect.Arthoughsomefilmsexproredmorecrassicarconc"ptiJnsof the poeticas a sourceof or_der'whoreness,and unity,thisstresson fragmentationand ambiguityre_
loeticdocumentaries.
continuedaspectsofthispoeticmode
1O4 I INTRODUCTION TO DOCUMENTARY
lly t;ottltir:;1,worlrlrl,lll,r',rlWrrr;lrl':;.'irrrrrTrtl()t:yhtrr(11):14),orrllrcun
Iottcltcdllcitulyol(.cylorr(lirrllrrrkir)rjcspitcllrr:rnroirrl:;ol r;orrrrrrcrr;c;rrrrl
r;olonialisrn,[]cr| | l;r;rrr;lrir'r;(i/irss(1958),a tributetothoskillol trirditionlrl
r;lassblowersirrr<lllrcIrcautyoftheirwork,or LesBlank'sAlwaysforPlcu-
:;ure(1978),a celebrationof MardiGrasfestivitiesin NewOrleans,return
lo a moreclassicsenseof unityandbeautyanddiscovertracesof themin
lhehistoricalworld.Thepoeticmodehasmanyfacets,buttheyallempha-
sizethewaysinwhichthefilmmaker'svoicegivesfragmentsof the histor-
icalworlda formal,aestheticintegritypeculiarto thefilmitself.
P6terForgdcs'sremarkablereworkingsof amateurmoviesintohistor-
icaldocumentsstressespoetic,associativequalitiesovertransferringin-
formationor winningus overto a particularpointof view.FreeFall(1998),
forexample,chroniclesthe fateof EuropeanJews in the 1930sand 40s
throughthehomemoviesofa successfulJewishbusinessman,GyorgyPeto,
andDanubeExodus(1999)followsthejourneysof a Danubecruiseship
as ittakesJewsfromHungaryto the BlackSeaon theirflightto Palestine
andthentakesGermansfrom Bessarabia(thenorthernpartof Romania
at thetime)as theyaredrivenout bythe Russiansand evacuatedto Ger-
many,onlyto be relocatedin Poland.Thehistoricalfootage,treezeframes,
slowmotion,tintedimages,selectivemomentsof color,occasionaltitlesto
identifytimeand place,voicesthat recitediaryentries,and hauntingmu-
sicbuilda toneand moodfar morethantheyexplainthe war or describe
itscourseof action.
THE EXPOSITORY MODE
Thismodeassemblesfragmentsof the historicalworldintoa morerhetor-
icalor argumentativeframethanan aestheticor poeticone.Theexpository
modeaddressestheviewerdirectly,withtitlesorvoicesthatproposea per-
spective,advancean argument,or recounthistory.Expositoryfilmsadopt
eithera voice-of-Godcommentary(thespeakeris heardbutneverseen),
such as we find in lhe WhyWeFight series, Victoryaf Sea (1952-53), The
City (1939),Bloodof the Beasts(1949),andDead Birds(1963),or utilize
a voice-of-authoritycommentary(thespeakerisheardandalsoseen),such
as we find in televisionnewscasts,America'sMost Wanted,TheSellingof
the Pentagon(1971),16in WebsterGroves(1966),RobertHughes'sIhe
Shockof the New (1980),KennethClark'sCivilization,or John Berger's
Waysof Seeing (1974).
Thevoice-of-Godtraditionfosteredthecultivationof the professionally
trained,richlytonedmalevoiceof commentarythat proveda hallmarkof
theexpositorymodeeventhoughsomeofthemostimpressivefilmschose
WhatTypes of DocumentaryAreThere? | 105

5. YoseniteTheFateofHeaven(JonEIse,19gg)photocourtesyofJonElse
ThetensionbetweenpublicaccessandconservationisthefocusofthisfilmRobertRedford,s
commentaryfallsintothecategoryofvojce-of-GodaddressinasmuchasweneverseelVrRed-
fordTotheextentthatMrRedford'slong{imeadvocacyforenvjronmentalissuesmakesnrma
moreinformedspeakerthanananonymouscommentatorwouldbe,healsofullillsthefunction0f
avoiceofauthority
lesspolishedvoicespreciseryforthecredibiritygainedbyavoidingtoomuch
polish.Jorislvens'sgreatfilmurgingsupportforthe Republican-defenders
of spanishdemocracy,ThespanishEarth(1937),forexampre,existsin at
leastthreeversions.Nonehasa professionarcommentator.Attthreenave
identicalimagetracks,butthe Frenchversionusesan ad-ribbedcommen-
taryby thefamousFrenchfilmdirectorJeanRenoirwhilethe Engrishver_
sionsrelyonorsonweilesandErnestHemingway.rvenschoseweilesfirst,
but his deliveryproveda bit too eregant;it bestoweda humanisticcom_
passionon the eventswherelvenshopedfora toughersenseof visceral
engagement.Hemingway,who had writtenthe commentary,provedthe
moreeffectivevoice.Hebroughta matter-of-factbutclearlycommittedtone
to a filmthatwantedto garvanizesupportmorethancompassion.(some
106 I INTRODUCTION TO DOCUMENTARY
trttttll; t;ltll r;tcrltl lltr,/ol t'ovcr loWclltl:; tlvtttt lltotttllt llttt vott:c wc lttl;tl l:;
I lcrrrirtg;wiry':;)
Expositclryrkrr:rrrttcttlitriesrelyheavilyonan informinglogiccarriedby
tlresookenword.ln a reversalof thetraditionalemphasisin film,images
r;ervea supportingrole.Theyillustrate,illuminate,evoke,or act in coun-
turpointto whatis said.Thecommentaryistypicallypresentedas distinct
lromthe imagesof the historicalworldthataccompanyit.lt servesto or-
ryanizetheseimagesand makesenseof themjust as a writtencaption
ryuidesourattentionandemphasizessomeofthemanymeaningsandin-
tcrpretationsof a stillimage.Thecommentaryisthereforepresumedto be
ofa higherorderthantheaccompanyingimages.ltcomesfromsomeplace
lhatremainsunspecifiedbut associatedwith objectivityor omniscience.
fhe commentary,in fact,representsthe perspectiveor argumentof the
lrlm.We takeour cuefromthe commentaryand understandthe images
irsevidenceor demonstrationfor whatis said.Televisionnewsdescrip-
lionsof faminein Ethiopiaas "biblical,"for example,seemedprovedby
wide-angleshotsof greatmassesof starvingpeopleclusteredtogether
onan openplain.
Editingin the expositorymode generallyservesless to establisha
rhythmorformalpattern,as itdoesinthepoeticmode,thanto maintainthe
r;ontinuityof thespokenargumentor perspective.We cancallthiseviden-
lraryediting.Sucheditingmaysacrificespatialand temporalcontinuityto
ropeinimagesfromfar-flungplacesiftheyhelpadvancetheargument.The
cxpositoryfilmmakeroften has greaterfreedom in the selectionand
;rrrangementof imagesthanthefictionfilmmaker.ln ThePlowThatBroke
thePtains(1936)shotsof arid prairielandscapescamefromall overthe
Midwest,for example,to supportthe claimof widespreaddamageto the
tano.
Theexpositorymodeemphasizestheimpressionofobjectivityandwell-
supportedargument.The votce-overcommentaryseemsliterally"above"
thefray;it hasthe capacityto judgeactionsin the historicalworldwithout
lreingcaughtup inthem.Theprofessionalcommentator'sofficialtone,like
lheauthoritativemannerof newsanchorsand reporters,strivesto builda
senseof credibiiityfromqualitiessuchas distance,neutrality,disinterest-
edness,or omniscience.Thesequalitiescanbe adaptedto an irontcpoint
of viewsuchas we findin CharlesKuralt'scommentaryfor 16in Webster
Grovesor subvertedevenmorethoroughlyin a filmsuchas Landwithout
Bread,withitsimplicitattackon theverynotionof objectivity.
Expositorydocumentaryfacilitatesgeneralizationandlarge-scaleargu-
mentation.Theimagescansupportthebasicclaimsof a generalargument
WhatTypes of DocumentaryAreThere? | 1O7

6. rirlllct llt;ilr ( ()il',liltr | | /t/trl',t'tl:;t: ()l lllo l);llltt:ttl;tttltt::; l();t t;tv{'tt t;(}tllt:l ol
llr() WOtlrl lllr,rrr,rrlr..rl,,rr,rll()rrl:; itn ()<;()trOilry()l illlillylil:; i;lll(lo lx)llll:' cilll
lrrt rnado sttt:r;ttrr;lly,rrrtlpotttlt:tlly in wOrdS Ex;ltlsitory doctllllorllilty l1; illl
r,lealmodckrrt;{,rrvr:yttt(Jtltlormationor mobilizingSupportwithitrir Irittttc
workthatpre-existsthefilm.Inthiscase,a filmwilladdto our stockpileof
knowledgebutnotchallengeorsubvertthecategoriesbywhichsuchknowl-
Odgegetsorganized.commonsensemakesa pedectbasisforthistypeof
reoresentationaboutthe worldSincecommonsense,likerhetoric,is less
subjectto logicthanto belief.
FrankcapracouldorganizemuchofhisargumentforwhyyoungAmer-
icanmenshouldwillinglyjointhebattleduringworldwar ll in lhe why we
Fighfseries,for example,by appealingto a mix of nativepatriotism,the
rdealsof Americandemocracy,theatrocitiesof theAxiswarmachine,and
the malignantevilof Hitler,Mussolini,and Hirohito.ln the blackandwhite
alternativesof a "freeworld"versusa "slaveworld,"whowouldnotchoose
to defenda freeworld?common sensemadethe answersimple-to the
predominantlywhiteaudiencethoroughlyimbuedwitha "meltingpot"be-
liefin Americanvalues.
some fiftyyearslater,capra's appealseems remarkablynaiveand
overblownin itstreatmentof patrioticvirtueand democraticideals.Com-
monsenseis lessan enduringthana historicallyconditionedsetof values
andperspectives.Forthisreasonsomeexpositoryfilmsthatseemclassic
examplesoforatoricalpersUasivenessatonemomentwillSeemquitedated
atanother.Thebasicargumentmaystillhavemerit,butwhatcountsascom-
monsensemaychangeconsiderably.
THE OBSERVATIONAL MODE
Poeticand expositorymodesof documentaryoftensacrificedthe specific
actoffilmingpeopleto constructformalpatternsor persuasivearguments.
The filmmakergatheredthe necessaryrawmaterialsandthenfashioned
a meditation,perspective,or argumentfromthem.what if the filmmaker
weresimplyto observewhathappensinfrontof thecamerawithoutovert
intervention?Wouldthisnotbe a new,compellingformof documentation?
Developmentsin canada, Europe,andthe Unitedstatesin the years
afterWorldWarll culminatedaround1960invarious16mmcamerassuch
astheArriflexandAuriconandtaperecorderssuchastheNagrathatcould
be easilyhandledbyoneperson.Speechcouldnowbe synchronizedwith
imageswithouttheuseofbulkyequipmentorcablesthattetheredrecorders
andcameratogether.Thecameraandtaperecordercouldmovefreelyabout
a sceneand recordwhathappenedas it happened.
TriunphoftheWiIl(LeniRiefenstahl,1935)
Thephysicalgapandhierarchicaldis-
tinctionbetweenleaderandfollowersagain
c0mesacrossclearlyinthissceneofHiiler's
paradethroughthestreetsofNuremberg
TriunphaftheWill
Thesoldier'ssalute,above,parallelsthis
low-angleviewoftheGermaneagleand
NaziswastjkaLikeHitlertheeagleserves
asasymbolofGermanpowerltpresides
overthestreamol marchingtroopsthat
passbelowit,galvanizingtheirmovement
intoatributetonationalunity
TheSpanishEarth(Jorislvens193/)
lvens'ssupportfortheRepublicancause
againsttheNazi-backedrebellionofGen-
eralFrancofollowedfromhispoliticalcom-
mitmenttodemocraticandsocialistideals
Hisde-emphasisonhierarchyinthisshot
ofanofficerandasoldiercontrastssharply
withRiefenstahl'sshootingstyte
TheSpanishEarth
IncontrasttothepageantryofRlefen-
stahl'sendlessparadesandspeeches,lvens
capturesthemodestqualityof everyday
rurallifein1930sSpainThisimageofthe
town,Fuenteduena,situatedneartheshift-
ingbattlefront,suggestshowordinarylives
arejeopardized,notgalvanized,bythefas-
cistrebellion
108 I INTRODUCTION TO DOCUMENTARY WhatTypes of DocumentaryAre There? I 109

7. VictoryatSea(HenrySolomonandlsaacKleinerman,i952_53)
LikeNightandFog,VictoryatSeareturnstotherecentpasttotellthestoryofWorldWarll
MadeasatelevisionseriesforCBs,itadoptsacommemorativestanceltrecallsbattlesandstrate-
gies,setbacksandvictoriesfromtheperspectiveolthesurvivororveran.ltcelebratesnavalpower
anditscontribution,givingscantattentiontothegroundwarorthevilianconsequencesthatare
attheheartofNightandFogBothIilmshowever,relyoncompilationoffootageshotcontem-
poraneouslywiththeeventstowhichtheIilmsnowreturn.Compilationfilmsinvariablyalterthe
meaningofthelootagetheyincorporateHere,bothfilmsusefootageforpurpgsesthatarepos-
sibleonlytothosewhoreflectonthemeaningofthepastratherthanreporttheoccurrencesofthe
moment
All of the formsof controlthata poeticor expositoryfilmmakermight
exerciseoverthestaging,arrangement,orcompositionof a sceneDecame
sacrificedto observinglivedexperiencespontaneously.Honoringthisspirit
ofobservationinpost-productioneditingaswellasduringshootingresulted
infilmswithno voice-overcommentary,nosupplementarymusicor sound
effects,no intertitles,no historicalreenactments,no behaviorrepeatedfor
thecamera,andnotevenanyinterviews.what wesawwaswhattherewas,
or so it seemedin Primary(1960),HighSchool(196g),LesRacquetteurs
(MichelBraultandGillesGroulx,195g),abouta groupof Montrearersen-
joyingvariousgamesinthesnow,portionsof chronicleofa summe4which
profilesthelivesofseveralindividualsintheparisof 1960,Thechafu(1962),
110 I INTRODUCTION TO DOCUMENTARY
rlrrrttl lltr'l,t,,l rl.ry..,,l ,r 1r l1 r oltrlcrrrnrttl lo rlr,;rllt, (ltrttrrtr'!ilttlltt ( l1)/{)),
rlrrttll lltr'll,rllttrr;"1',trr", tttl,tttlt)ll; (:ollt:tlll;rl All;trrl()trl' (l'rltlr'llll'l' wllIlr'
r 1t;11's tftr;rllr,rl llrr, lr,rrrrl:, rrl llrc llCll's Arlgcls ts lxrrtiltlly <;ituqltl orl oilrll
, t,r,Don'lL<toltll,rr:/r(11)(i/),aboutBobDylan'stourof Englanditt 19ti5,
Att)ntereyPop(1968),abouta musicfestivalfeaturingOtisRedding,Janis
r,r1rlin,JimiHendrix,the JeffersonAirplane,and others,or Jane(1962)'
1'rrfilingJaneFondaas shepreparesfora rolein a Broadwayplay.
Theresultingfootageoftenrecalledtheworkofthe ltalianneo-realists.
Wc lookin on lifeas it is lived.Socialactorsengagewithone another,ig-
,rorirgthefilmmakers.Oftenthe charactersarecaughtup in pressingde-
rrurndsora crisisoftheirown.Thisrequirestheirattentionanddrawsitaway
lromtheoresenceoffilmmakers.Thescenestend,likefiction,to revealas-
l,cctsof characterandindividuality.We makeinferencesandcometo con-
, llisionson the basisof behaviorwe observeor overhear.Thefilmmaker's
rctirementto thepositionof observercallsontheviewerto takea moreac-
trverolein determiningthesignificanceof whatis saidanddone.
The observationalmodeposesa seriesof ethicalconsiderationsthat
rrrvolvethe act of observingothersgo abouttheiraffairs.ls suchan act in
rrrdof itselfvoyeuristic?Doesitplacetheviewerisa necessarilylesscom-
Irrtablepositionthanina fictionfilm?Infictron,scenesarecontrivedforus
l()overseeandoverhearentirely,whereasdocumentaryscenesrepresent
tlrelivedexperienceof actualpeoplethatwe happento witness.Thispo-
ition,"atthekeyholei'canfeeluncomfortableifa pleasureinlookingseems
Iotakepriorityoverthe chanceto acknowledgeand interactwiththe one
r;een.Thisdiscomfortcan be evenmoreacutewhenthe personis notan
,rctorwho haswillinglyagreedto be observedplayinga partin a fiction.
The impressionthatthe filmmakeris not intrudrngon the behaviorof
othersalsoraisesthequestionof unacknowledgedor indirectintrusion.Do
lieopleconductthemselvesin waysthatwillcolorour perceptionof them,
lorbetteror worse,in orderto satisfya filmmakerwho doesnotsaywhat
rlis he wants?Doesthe filmmakerseekout othersto representbecause
theypossessqualitiesthat mayfascinateviewersforthe wrongreasons?
thisquestionoftencomesupwithethnographicfilmsthatobserve,inother
cultures,behaviorthatmay,withoutadequatecontextualization,seemex-
oticor bizarre,morepartof a "cinemaof attractions"thanscience.Hasthe
filmmakersoughtthe informedconsentof partrcipantsand madeit possi-
bleforsuchinformedconsentto be understoodandgiven?Towhatextent
cana filmmakerexplainthepossibleconsequencesofallowingbehaviorto
heobservedand representedto others?
FredWiseman,forexample,requestsconsentverballywhenheshoots
butassumesthat when he shootsin publicinstitutionshe has a rightto
WhatTypes of DocumentaryAre There? | 111

8. l{)(;()l(lwltitllt;rppcn:t,ltc1cv1t (lt;1tl:ip; ttllr;t1llr1t:;;1tVrltrlrrrl gvlr llrllrrt;rl
rosrrll I voll 1;o,lllillly [)itrltotl)irrls n tlrylt Scltottl lorrrrl llrr'lrlr1 l;rrr rtnd
represcntative even though mosl critics have considerctl rl ;r lrrrrsh indict-
ment of school regimentation and discipline. A radically different approach
occursin TwoLaws(l9B.t),aboutAboriginallandrights,wherethefilm_
makersdid notfilmanythingwithoutboththeconsentandcollaborationof
theparticipants.Everythingfromcontenttocameralenseswasopentodis-
cussionand mutualagreement.
sincetheobservationalfilmmakeradoptsa peculiarmodeof presence
"onthe scene"in whichhe or she appearsto be invisibleand non-partici-
patory,the questionalso arisesof when doesthe filmmakerhavea re-
sponsibilityto intervene?what if somethinghappensthatmayjeopardize
or injureone of the socialactors?shoulda cameramanfilmthe immola-
tionof a Vietnamesemonkwho,knowingthatthereare cameraspresenr
to recordthe event,setshimselfon fireto protesttheVietnamesewar,or
shouldthecameramanrefuseor try to dissuadethe monk?shoulda film-
makeraccepta knifeas a giftfroma participantin the courseof filminga
murdertrial,and thenturnthatgiftoverto the policewhenbloodis found
on it (asJoe Berlingerand Brucesinofskydo in their tilmparadiseLost
[1996])?Thislastexamplemovesustowardan unexpectedor inadvertent
formof participationratherthanobservationas it alsoraisesbroadissues
aboutthefilmmaker'srelationshipwithhisor hersubjects.
observationalfilmsexhibitparticularstrengthin givinga senseof the
durationof actualevents.Theybreakwiththedramaticpaceof marnstream
fictionfilmsand the sometimeshurriedassemblyof imagesthat support
expositoryor poeticdocumentaries.when Fredwiseman,forexample,ob-
servesthemakingofa thirty-secondtelevisioncommercialforsometwenty-
fiveminutesof screentimein Modet(1ggo),he conveysthesenseof hav-
ingobservedeverythingworthnotingabouttheshooting.
similarly,whenDavidMacDougallfilmsextendeddiscussionsbetween
hisprincipalcharacter,Lorang,and oneof hispeersaboutthe brideprice
for Lorang'sdaughterin weddingcamets(19g0),he shiftsour attention
fromwhatthefinalagreementisorwhatnewnarrativeissuearisesbecause
of it to thefeelandtextureof the discussionitself:the bodylanguageand
eyecontact,theintonationandtoneofthevoices,the pausesand,,empty,'
timethatgivethe encounterthesenseof concrete,livedreality.
MacDougallhimselfdescribesthe fascinationof livedexperienceas
somethingthatis mostvividlyexperiencedas a differencebetweenrushes
(theuneditedfootageas it was originallyshot)and an editedsequence.
The rushesseemto havea densityandvitalitythatthe editedfilmtacks.A
rossoccursevenas structureandperspectiveareadded:
112 I INTRODUCTION TO DOCUMENTARY
I lto r,r,tr',r'ol lo ,'r'ttt lI trl|rrltly lttt:'tltvtl vltltlC:' lttttt:tltvtltl ttl lltl: llll'll{):;
Irilrl ttrlCltr|,rl lry llr, lrlrrrrrr.rkr:t ill lll(l lllll(.'tll ltltlttttr.; lrtll tttt'tr:lltr:Vcrl ttl llttl
cornt)lol{)(lltlrrrll t ,,r"llrottt;ltttrcveryreasonslormakingtilmsaresome-
howcorrlr;rrlrtrl(lrIlryilr0rrrirkingofthemTheprocessesofeditinga{ilmfrom
therushesirrvr.rlvobothreducingthelengthoverallandcuttingmostshots
to shorterlengths.Boththeseprocessesprogressivelycenterparticular
meanings.SometimesfiImmakersappeartorecognizethiswhentheytryto
preseruesomeofthequalitiesoftherushesintheirfilms,orreintroducetnose
qualitiesthroughothermeans.("whenLesslsLess,"Iransculturalcinema,
p.215)
fhe presenceof thecamera"onthe scene"testifiesto itspresencein the
lristoricalworld.This affirmsa senseof commitmentor engagementwith
theimmediate,intimate,andpersonalasitoccurs.Thisalsoaffirmsa sense
offidelitytowhatoccursthatcanpasson eventsto usasiftheysimplyhap-
penedwhen they have,in fact,been constructedto havethat very ap-
Dearance.Onemodestexampleisthe"maskedinterview."ln thiscasethe
filmmakerworksin a moreparticipatorywaywithhissubjectsto establish
thegeneralsubjectof a sceneand thenfilmsit in an observationalman-
ner.DavidMacDougallhas donethisquiteeffectivelyin severalfilms.An
exampleisthesceneinKenyaBoranwhere,withoutpayingheedtothe
camerabutinaccordwiththegeneralguidelinesestablishedbeforeshoot-
rngbegan,two Kenyantribesmendiscusstheirviewsof the government's
introductionof birthcontrolmeasures.
A morecomplexexampleistheeventstagedto becomepartofthehis-
toricalrecord.Pressconferences,for example,may be filmedin a purely
observationalstyle,butsucheventswouldnotexistat all if it werenotfor
the presenceof the camera.This is the reverseof the basicpremisebe-
hindobservationalfilms,thatwhatweseeiswhatwouldhaveoccurredwere
thecameranotthereto observeit.
This reversaltook on monumentalproportionsin one of the first"ob-
servational"documentaries,LeniRiefenstahl'sTriumphof thewill.Afteran
rntroductorysetof titlesthatsetthe stageforthe GermanNationalSocial-
ist (Nazi)Party's1934Nurembergrally,Riefenstahlobserveseventswith
nofurthercommentary.Events-predominantlyparades,reviewsoftroops,
massassemblies,imagesof Hitler,andspeeches-occuras ifthecamera
simplyrecordedwhatwouldhavehappenedanyway.At twohoursrunntng
time,thefilmcan givethe impressionof havingrecordedhistoricalevents
alltoofaithfullyand unthinkingly.
Andyet,verylittlewouldhavehappenedas it didwereit notfortheex-
pressintentof the NaziPartyto makea filmof this rally.Riefenstahlhad
enormousresourcesplacedat her drsposal,and eventswere carefully
plannedto facilitatetheirfilming,includingtherepeatfilmingof portionsof
WhatTypes of DocumentaryAre There? | 113

9. RoyCohn/lackSnith(JtilGodmilow,1994)
PhotocourtesyofJillGodmilow
GodmilowsIilm,likemanydocumentarjesof
musicconcerts,observesapublicperformance;
inthiscasesherecordstwoone-manplaysby
RonVawterGiventhatsucheventsareunder_
stoodtobeperformancesinthefirstplace,they
allowthefilmmakertoavoidsomeoftheaccu_
sati0nsthatthepresenceofthecameraaltered
whatwouldhavehappenedhadthecameranot
beenthere
RoyCohn/JackSm[h(JillGo(lrrl{)w1l')l)
PhotocourtesyofJillGodmilow
Godmilowmakesuseofedilitltllrtt:rtr'tli't
distinctperspectiveonRonVitwltrt;1rr:tlirt
manceasgayundergroundliltttttt;tl'rrr,lr,I
Smithandtlght-wing,antiCotttttttttt.'l(rr,
closetedgay)lawyerRoyCohtll3yittltrtrttllrtrl
thetwoseparateperlormanccsslttrtltrtw'l
creasedattentiontothecontraslitttlw,tV l
whichthetwomendealtwiththeirscxtt,rlrly,lrrr
ingthe1950s
somespeechesatanothertimeandplacewhentheoriginalfootageproved
unusable.(Therepeatedportionsare reenactedso thattheybrendin with
theoriginalspeeches,hidingthecoilaborationthatwentintotheirmaking.)
Triumphof the wittdemonstratesthe powerof the imageto represent
the historicalworrdat the samemomentas it participatesin theconstruc_
tionofaspectsof thehistoricarworrditserf.such participation,especiailyin
thecontextof NaziGermany,carriesan auraof dupricity.Thiswasthe rast
thingobservationalfilmmakerslikeRobertDrew D.A.pennebaker,Richard
Leacock,andFredwisemanwantedintheirownwork.Theintegrityoftheir
observationalstancesuccessfuilyavoidedit,forthe mostpart,-andyetthe
underlyingact of beingpresentat an eventbutfirmingit as if absent,as if
thefilmmakerweresimprya "fryonthewail,',invitesdebateasto howmuch
of whatwe see wourdbe the same if the camerawere notthereor how
114 I INTRODUCTION TO DOCUMENTARY
muchwoulddifferif thefilmmaker'spresenceweremorereadilyacknowl-
edged.Thatsuchdebateisbyitsverynatureundecidablecontinuestofuel
a certainsenseof mystery,or disquiet,aboutobservationalcinema.
THE PARTICIPATORY MODE
The socialscienceshavelong promotedthe studyof socialgroups.An-
thropology,forexample,remainsheavilydefinedbythepracticeoffieldwork,
wherean anthropologistlivesamonga peoplefor an extendedperiodof
timeandthenwritesupwhatshehaslearned.Suchresearchusuallycalls
forsomeformof participant-observation.Theresearchergoesintothefield,
participatesinthelivesof others,gainsa corporealorvisceralfeelforwhat
lifeina givencontextis like,andthenreflectsonthisexperience,usingthe
WhatTypesof DocumentaryAreThere? | 115

10. looll;;ttttl tttt:llttttll;ol lrttlltropolo(ly ()r r;(x)r()lrlr;ylo rkr:,., ',1l.'rrrr;llr()ro,'(;illls
lorpartrcipirtiorr;"bcinghcre"ailowsforobservatiorrilrlrrr:;ro:;;ry,lrrcrierd
workerdoesnotalow herserfto "gonative,"undernorrrrirr<;rrcurnstances,
butretainsa degreeof detachmentthatdifferentiatesherfromthoseabout
whomshewrites.Anthroporogyhas,infact,consistenflydependedon this
complexactof engagementandseparationbetweentwocuituresto define
itself.
Documentaryfirmmakersarsogo intothe fierd;they,too, riveamong
othersandspeakaboutor representwhattheyexperience.Thepracticeof
participant-observation,however,hasnotbecomea paradigm.Themethods
andpracticesof socialscienceresearchhaveremainedsubordinateto the
moreprevalentrhetoricalpracticeof movingandpersuadingan audience.
observationardocumentaryde-emphasizespersuasionto giveusa sense
of whatit is liketo be in a givensituationbutwithouta senseof whatit is
likeforthe firmmakerto be there,too.participatorydocumentarygivesus
a senseofwhatitis likeforthefilmmakerto beina givensituationandhow
that situationartersas a resurt.The typesand degreesof arterationherp
definevariationswithinthe participatorymodeof documentarv.
when we viewparticipatorydocumentarieswe expectto witnessthe
historicalworrdas representedby someonewho activeryengageswith,
ratherthanunobtrusiveryobserves,poeticailyreconfigur"",o,.lrgumenta-
tivelyassemblesthatworld.Thefilmmakerstepsoutfrombehindthecloak
of voice-overcommentary,stepsawayfrompoeticmeditation,stepsdown
froma fly-on-the-wailperch,and becomesa sociaractor(armost)rikeany
other.(Almostrikeanyotherbecausethefirmmakerretainsthecamera,and
withit,a certaindegreeof potentiarpowerandcontroroverevents.)
Participatorydocumentariesrikechronicreof a summer,portraitofJa-
son,or word rs ouf invorvetheethicsandporiticsof encounter.Thisis the
encounterbetweenonewhowierdsa movrecameraandonewhoooesnot.
Howdo filmmakerand sociaractorrespondto eachother?Howdo they
negotiatecontroland shareresponsibility?How muchcan the filmmaker
insistontestimonywhenit ispainfurtoprovideit?what responsibiritydoes
the filmmakerhavefor the emotionaraftermathof appearingon camera?
what tiesjoinfirmmakerandsubjectandwhatneedsdividelhem?
The senseof bodilypresence,ratherthan absence,locatesthe film_
maker"onthe scene-"we expectthatwhatwe rearnwiilhingeon the na-
tureandqualityoftheencounterbetweenfirmmakerandsubjectratherthan
on generalizationssupportedby imagesiiluminatinga givenperspective.
we mayseeas weilas hearthefirmmakeractand respondon thespot,in
thesamehistoricararenaasthefirm'ssubjects.Thepossibiritiesof serving
as mentor,critic,interrogator,collaborator,or provocateurarise.
116 I INTRODUCTION TO DOCUMENTARY
I
I
fakeover(DauidandJudithMacDougall,1981)PhotocourtesyofDavidMacDougall
TheMacDougallshaveevolvedacollaborativestyleofIilmmakingwiththesubjectsoltheir
ethnographicfilmsInaseriesoffilmsmadeonAboriginalissues,ofwhichTakeoverisaplma
example,theyhaveoftenservedaswitnessestothetestimonialstatementsoftraditionsandbc
liefsthatAboriginalpeopleofferintheirdisputeswiththegovernmentoverlandrightsandother
mattersTheinteractionishighlyparticipatory,althoughtheresultcanseem,atfirst,unobtrusive
orobservationalsincemuchofthecollaboratl0n0ccurspriortolheactoffilminq
Participatorydocumentarycan stressthe actual,livedencounterbe-
tweenfilmmakerandsubjectinthespiritof DzigaVertov'sTheMan witha
MovieCamera,JeanRouchand EdgarMorin'sChronicleofa Summer,Jon
Alpert's Hard Metals Disease(1987),Jon Silver's Watsonvilleon Strike
(1989),or Ross McElwhee'sSherman'sMarch (1985).The filmmaker's
presencetakeson heightenedimportance,fromthephysicalactof"getting
theshot"thatfiguresso prominenllyinTheMan witha MovieCameralothe
politicalact of joiningforceswithone'ssubjectsas Jon Silverdoesat the
startof Watsonvilleon Strikewhen he asksthe farmworkersif he canfilm
intheunionhallorasJonAlpertdoeswhenhetranslatesintoSpanishwhat
theworkersheaccompaniesto Mexicotrytosaytotheircounterpartsabout
thedangersof HMD(hardmetalsdisease).
ThisstyleoffilmmakingiswhatRouchandMorintermedcin6mav6rite,
WhatTypes of DocumentaryAreThere? | 117

11. It;ttr:;llrltttr;trrloIrcrrr;lrL)zrt;irVcrlov'l;ltllclorlrl; ncw:irr.r,l.,ol l;()vrol:;(x)i-
oly,ktttoptitvr*t.As "lilrrtIrutlt,"tlrcidoaernphasizestlr;rlllrr:rr; lltglruthof
an encounterratherthanthe absoluteor untamperedtruth,we see how
thefilmmakerandsubjectnegotiatea relationship,howtheyacttowardone
another,whatformsof powerand controlcomeintoplay,andwhatlevels
of revelationor rapportstemfromthisspecificformof encounter.
lf thereis a truthhereit is the truthof a formof interactionthatwould
notexistwereitnotforthecamera.Inthissenseitistheoppositeoftheob-
servationalpremisethatwhatwe see iswhatwe wouldhaveseenhadwe
beentherein lieuofthecamera.Inparticipatorydocumentary,whatwesee
is whatwe can see onlywhena camera,or filmmaker,is thereinsteadof
ourselves.Jean-LucGodardonceclaimedthatcinemais truthtwenty-four
timesa second:participatorydocumentarymakesgoodon Godard'sclaim.
Chronicleof a Summe[ for example,involvesscenesthat resultfrom
the collaborativeinteractionsof filmmakersandtheirsubjects,an eclectic
groupof individualslivingin Parisin thesummerof1960.Inoneinstance
MarcellineLoridan,a youngwomanwholatermarriedthe Dutchfilmmaker
Joris lvens,speaks about her experienceas a Jewish deporteefrom
Francewho is sentto a Germanconcentrationcampduringworld war ll.
The camerafollowsher as she walksthroughthe place de la concorde
andthenthroughtheformerParisianmarket,LesHalles.she offersa quite
movingmonologueonherexperiences,butonlybecauseRouchandMorin
hadplannedthescenewithherandgivenherthetaperecorderto carry.lf
theyhadwaitedforthe eventto occuron itsownso theycouldobserveit,
itneverwouldhaveoccurred.Theypursuedthisnotionof collaborationstill
furtherbyscreeningpartsofthefilmto theparticipantsandfilmingtheen-
suingdiscussion.RouchandMorinalsoappearoncamera,discussingtheir
aimto study"thisstrangetribelivingin Paris"andassessing,at theendof
thefilm,whattheyhavelearned.
Similarly,in Nofa LoveStory(1981),BonnieKtein,thefilmmaker,and
LindaLeeTracy,an ex-stripper,discusstheirreactionsto variousformsof
pornographyastheyinterviewparticipantsinthesexindustry.lnonescene,
LindaLee posesfor a nudephotographand thendiscusseshow the ex-
periencemadeherfeel.Thetwowomenembarkon a journeythatis partly
exploratoryin a spiritsimilarto Rouchand Morin'sand partlyconfes-
sional/redemptivein an entirelydifferentsense.Theactof makingthefilm
playsa cathartic,redemptiverolein theirown lives;it is lessthe worldof
theirsubjectsthatchangesthantheirown.
lnsomecases,suchasMarcelOphuls'sTheSorrowandthepity (1g70),
on FrenchcollaborationwithGermanyduringworldwar ll,thefilmmaker's
voiceemergesprimarilyas a perspectiveon thesubjectmatterof thefilm.
118 I INTRODUCTION TO DOCUMENTARY
Crunb(IerryZwigofl1994)
TerryZwigofladoptsahighlyparticipatoryrelationshiptothecartoonstripartistRCrumblVany
oftheconversationsandinteractionsclearlywouldnothaveoccurredastheydohadZwigoffnot
beentherewithhiscamera.Crumbtakesamorerellectiveattitudetowardhimsellandamoreprob-
ingattitudetowardhisbrothersashecollaborateswithZwigoffsdesiretoexaminethecomplex-
itiesandcontradictionsofhislife
Thefilmmakerservesas a researcheror investigativereporter.In other
cases,thefilmmaker'svoiceemergesfromdirect,personalinvolvementin
theeventsthatunfold.Thiscan remainwithinthe orbitof the investigative
reporterwhomakeshisownpersonalinvolvementinthestorycentralto its
unfolding.An exampleistheworkof CanadianfilmmakerMichaelRubbo,
such as his Sad Song of YellowSkin (1970),where he exploresthe
ramificationsoftheVietnamWaramongthecivilianpopulationofVietnam.
Anotheris the workof NicholasBroomfield,who adoptsa brasher,more
confrontational-ifnotarrogant-styleinhis KurtandCourtney(1998):his
exasperationwithCourtneyLove'selusivenessdespiteunsubstantiatedsus-
picionsof hercomplicityin KurtCobain'sdeathcompelsBroomfieldto film
hisown,apparentlyspontaneousdenunciationof herat a ceremonialdin-
nersponsoredbytheAmericanCivilLibertiesUnion.
Inothercases,we moveawayfromthe investigativestanceto takeup
a moreresponsiveand reflectiverelationshipto unfoldingeventsthat in-
volvethefilmmaker.Thislatterchoicemovesus towardthediaryandper-
sonaltestimonial.Thefirst-personvoicebecomesprominentin theoverall
WhatTypes of DocumentaryAre There? | 119

12. rI
i
LasMadresdelaPlazadeMayo(SusanaMuflozandLourdesPortillo,1985)Photocourtesyof
LourdesPortillo
ThesetwowomenIilmmakersadoptahighlyparticipatoryrelationshipwiththemotherswho
riskedtheirlivestostagepublicdemonstrationsduringArgentina's"dirtywar"Thesonsanddaugh-
tersofthesewomenwereamongthe"disappeared"whomthegovernmentabducted,andolten
killedwithoutanynoticeorlegalproceedingsMuflozandPortillocouldnotshapethepublic
events,buttheycoulddrawoutthepersonalstoriesofthemotherswhosecouraqeledthemto
defyabrutallyrepressiveregime
structureofthefilm.lt isthefilmmaker'sparticipatoryengagementwithun-
foldingeventsthatholdsourattention.
NicholasNecroponte'sinvolvementwitha womanwhom he meetsin
NewYork'sCentralPark,whoseemstohavea complexbutnotentirelycred-
iblehistory,becomescentraltotheoverallstructureol Jupiter'sWife(1995).
Similarly,itis EmikoOmori'seffortsto retracethesuppressedhistoryof her
own family'sexperiencein the Japanese-Americanrelocationcampsof
WorldWarll thatgivesformto Rabbitin theMoon(1999).MariluMalletof-
fersan evenmoreexplicitlydiary-likestructureto her portraitof lifeas a
Chileanexilelivingin Montrealmarriedto CanadianfilmmakerMichael
Rubboin UnfinishedDiary(1983),as doesKazuoHarato hischronicleof
thecomplex,emotionallyvolatilerelationshiphereviveswithhisformerwife
as he andhiscurrentpartnerfollowherovera periodof timein Extremely
PersonalEros:LoveSong(1974).Thesefilmsmakethefilmmakerasvivid
12O I INTRODUCTION TO DOCUMENTARY
a personaas anyotherin theirfilms.As testimonialand confession,they
oftenexudea powerthat is revelatory.
Notallparticipatorydocumentariesstresstheongoing,open-endedex-
oerienceof the filmmakeror the interactionbetweenfilmmakerand sub-
jects.Thefilmmakermaywishto introducea broaderperspective,oftenone
thatis historicalin nature.Howcanthisbe done?The mostcommonan-
swerinvolvesthe intervrew.The interviewallowsthefilmmakerto address
peoplewho appearin the filmformallyratherthan addressthe audience
throughvoice-overcommentary.The interviewstandsas one of the most
commonformsof encounterbetweenfilmmakerand subjectin participa-
torydocumentarY.
lnterviewsarea distinctformof socialencounter.Theydifferfromordi-
naryconversationand the morecoerciveprocessof interrogationby dint
oftheinstitutionalframeworkinwhichtheyoccurandthespecificprotocols
orguidelinesthatstructurethem.lnterviewsoccurinanthropologicalorso-
cioiogicalfieldwork;theygo bythe nameof the"casehistory"in medicine
TheDevitNeverSleepslElDiabloNuncaDuernel
(LourdesPortillo,1995)PhotoscourtesyolLour-
desPortillo
DirectorLourdesPortllloasahard-boiledpri-
vateeyeThelilmrecountsherjourneytoMexico
toinvestigatethesuspiciousdeatholheruncle
Re{lexiveandironicattimes,P0rtill0n0netheless
leavesthequestionofwhetherherunclemetwith
Ioulplay,possiblyatthehandsofarelative,open
WhatTypes of DocumentaryAreThere? | 121

13. TheDevilNeverSleeps
Thefilmmaker,inthecourseofaninterview,insearchofclues,and,ideallytheconfessionthat
willsolvethemysteryAlthoughsheneverobtainsaconlesslon,thesensethatshemrghldoso
lendsanairofnarrative,Iilmnoir-likesuspensetothefilm
and socialwelfare;in psychoanalysis,theytakethe formof thetherapeu-
tic session;in lawthe interviewbecomesthe pre{rialprocessof "discov-
ery"and,duringtrials,testimony;ontelevision,itformsthebackboneoftalk
shows;injournalism,it takestheformof boththe interviewandthe press
conference;andineducation,itappearsas Socraticdialogue.MichelFou-
caultarguesthattheseformsallinvolveregulatedformsof exchange,with
an unevendistributionofpowerbetweenclientandinstitutionalpractitioner,
and thattheyhavetheirrootin the religioustraditionof the confessional.
Filmmakersmakeuse of the interviewto bringdifferentaccountsto-
getherina singlestory.Thevoiceofthefilmmakeremergesfromtheweave
of contributingvoicesandthe materialbroughtinto supportwhattheysay.
This compilationof interviewsand supportingmaterialhas givenus nu-
merousfilmhistories,lromln theYearof thePig(1969),onthewarinViet-
nam,to Eyeson thePrize,on the historyof the civilrightsmovement,and
lrom The Life and Timesof Rosie the Riveter,on women at work during
WorldWar ll, to Shoah,on the aftermathof the Holocaustfor thosewno
experiencedit.
Compilationfilmssuchas EstherShub'sTheFallof theRomanovDv-
122 I INTRODUCTION TO DOCUMENTARY
u,t:;lV,wllrlrr,,1r,,..r:rllr.lyorr,rrr;lrtvrrlloolltr;clotttttlllyljltttll;tttrltctttltltltl
lo lclllr r;orr,rllrr,.trrry,rl,rlr,lr;rcklo thobt-'qittttttttls<tlttxptlsttotytlot;tttttt:tt
l;rry.Pittlrt:rp;rloryrkrt;rrtttotttariesaddthe activecngagcmcrllol thc tilttr
rnakerwitlrlru r;rrlljcr;tsorinformantsandavoidanonymousvoice-overex-
position.Thissituatesthefilmmoresquarelyina givenmomentanddistinct
perspective;it enrichescommentarywith the grainof individualvoices.
Some,suchas BarbaraKopple'sHarlanCounty,U.S.A.(1977),on a coal
miner'sstrikein Kentucky,or MichaelMoore'sRogerandMe (1989),dwell
on eventsin the presentto whichthe filmmmakeris a participant,while
addingsomehistoricalbackground.Some,suchas ErrolMorris'sTheThin
Blue Line,Leon Gasts's When We WereKings(1996),on the 1974fight
betweenMuhammadAliandGeorgeForeman,or RayMueller'sTheWon-
derful,HorribleLifeof LeniRiefenstahl(1993),on hercontroversialcareer,
centeron the pastand howthosewithknowledgeof it nowrecountit.
The experienceof gaysand lesbiansin the daysbeforeStonewall,for
example,couldbe recountedas a generalsocialhistory,witha voice-over
commentaryand imagesthatillustratethe spokenpoints.lt couldalsobe
recountedin the wordsof thosewho livedthroughthesetimesby means
of interviews.Jon Adair'sWordls Out(1977)optsfor the secondchoice.
Adair,likeConnieFieldfor RosietheRiveter,screenedscoresof possible
subjectsbeforesettlingon the dozenor so who appearin thefilm.Unlike
Fieldor Emilede Antonio,Adairoptsto keepsupportingmaterialto a bare
minimum;hecompileshishistoryprimarilyfromthe"talkingheads"ofthose
who can putthischapterof Americansocialhtstoryintotheirown words.
Likeoralhistoriesthatare recordedandwrittenupto serveas onetypeof
primarysourcematerial,whichthisformresemblesbutalsodiffersfromin
thecarefulselectionandarrangementof interviewmaterial,thearticulate-
nessandemotionaldirectnessof thosewhospeakgivesfilmsoftestimony
a compellingquality.
Filmmakerswhoseekto representtheirowndirectencounterwiththeir
surroundingworldandthosewhoseekto representbroadsocialissuesand
historicalperspectivesthroughinterviewsandcompilationfootageconsti-
tutetwo largecomponentsof the participatorymode.As viewerswe have
the sensethat we are witnessto a form of dialoguebetweenfilmmaker
andsubjectthatstressessituatedengagement,negotiatedinteraction,and
emotion-ladenencounter.Thesequalitiesgivethe participatorymodeof
documentaryfilmmakingconsiderableappealas it roamsa widevariety
of subjectsfrom the most personalto the most historical.Often,in fact,
thismodedemonstrateshowthetwointertwineto yieldrepresentationsof
thehistoricalworldfromspecificperspectivesthatarebothcontingentand
committed.
WhatTypes of DocumentaryAre There? | 123

14. CadillacDesert(JonElse,1992)pholoscourtesyofJonElse
THE REFLEXIVT MODE
ll thehislorrr;;rlworklprovrrlosthemeetingplacetorlhc procttsst):ittl tttr
r;otiationbctwt:crrlilrrrrnakerand subjectin the participatorymodc,tho
[)rocessesof negotiationbetweenfilmmakerandviewerbecomethefocus
of attentionfor the reflexivemode.Ratherthanfollowingthe filmmakerin
herengagementwithothersocialactors,we nowattendto thefilmmaker's
engagementwithus,speakingnotonlyaboutthehistoricalworldbutabout
theproblemsand issuesof representingit as well.
TrinhMinh-ha'sdeclarationthat she will "speaknearby"ratherthan
"speakabout"Africa,in Reassemblage(1982),symbolizesthe shiftthat
reflexivityproduces:we nowattendlo howwerepresentthehistoricalworld
as well aslo whatgetsrepresented.Insteadof seeingthroughdocumen-
tariestotheworldbeyondthem,reflexivedocumentartesaskusto seedoc-
umentarylorwhatitis:a constructor representation.Jean-LucGodardand
Jean-PierreGorincarrythisto an extremein Letterto Jane(197), a a5-
minute"letter"in whichtheyscrutinizein greatdetaila journalisticphoto-
graphof Jane Fondaduringhervisitto NorthVietnam.No aspectof this
apparentlyfactualphotogoesunexamined.
Justas the observationalmodeof documentarydependson the film-
maker'sapparentabsencefromor non-interventionintheeventsrecorded,
the documentaryin generaldependson theviewer'sneglectof hisor her
actualsituation,in frontof a moviescreen,interpretinga film,in favorof
imaginaryaccessto the eventsshownon the screenas if it is onlythese
eventsthat requireinterpretation,notthefilm.The mottothata documen-
taryfilm is onlyas goodas its contentis compellingis whatthe reflexive
modeof documentarycallsintoquestion.
Oneof the issuesbroughtto theforein reflexivedocumentariesis the
onewithwhichwe beganthisbook:whatto do withpeople?Somefilms,
likeReassemblage,DaughterRite(1978),BontocEulogy(1995),or Farfrom
Poland(1984),addressthisquestiondirectlybycallingtheusualmeansof
representationintoquestion:Reassemblagebreakswiththe realistcon-
ventionsof ethnographyto questionthepowerofthecamera'sgazeto rep-
resent,and misrepresent,others;DaughterFife subvertsrelianceon so-
cial actors by usingtwo actressesto play sisterswho reflecton their
relationshipto theirmother,usinginsightsgatheredfrominterviewswitha
widerangeof womenbutwithholdingthevoicesofthe intervieweesthem-
selves;BontocEulogyrecountsthe familyhistoryof the filmmaker'sown
grandfather,whowastakenfromthePhilippinesto appearaspartofanex-
hibitof Filipinolifeat theSt.LouisWorldFairin 1904throughstagedreen-
actmentsand imaginedmemoriesthatcallconventionalrulesof evidence
WhatTypes of DocumentaryAreThere? | 125

15. surnamevietGivenNameNan(TrinhT.Minh-ha,19g9)photoscourtesyofTrinhT Minh_ha
Thesethreesuccessiveshots,eachanextremeclose-upthatomitsportions0ltheinterviewees
face,correspondtothepre-productionstoryboarddesignedbythefilmmakerTheirviolationof
lhenormalconventionsforfilminginterviewsbothcallsourattentiontotheformalityandcon-
ventionalityofinterviewsandsignalsthatthisisnota(normal)interview.
intoquestion;Farfrompoland'sdirector,JillGodmilow,addressesus di-
rectlyto ponderthe problemsof representingthe solidaritymovementin
Polandwhenshehasonlypartialaccessto theactualevents.Thesefilms
set outto heightenour awarenessof the problemsof representingothers
as muchas theyset outto convinceus of the authenticityor truthfulness
of representationitself.
Reflexivedocumentariesalsoaddressissuesof realism.Thisis a style
thatseemsto provideunproblematicaccessto the world;it takesformas
physical,psychological,and emotionalrealismthroughtechniquesof evi-
dentiaryor continuityediting,characterdevelopment,and narrativestruc-
ture.Reflexivedocumentarieschallengethesetechniquesandconventions.
surname viet GivenName Nam (19g9),for example,relieson interviews
withwomeninvietnamwhodescribetheoppressiveconditionstheyhave
facedsincethe end of the war,butthenhalfwaythroughthe filmwe dis-
cover(ifvariousstylistichintshaven'ttippedusoff) thattheinterviewswere
stagedin morewaysthanone:thewomenwhoplayvietnamesewomenIn
Vietnamare actuallyimmigrantsto the Unitedstatesreciting,on a stage
set,accountstranscribedandeditedbyTrinhfrominterviewsconductedin
Vietnamby someoneelsewithotherwomenl
similarly,in TheMan witha Moviecamera,DzigaVertovdemonstrates
howthe impressionof realitycomesto be constructedby beginningwitha
sceneofthecameraman,MikhailKaufman,filmingpeopleridingina norse-
drawncarriagefroma carthatrunsalongsidethecarriage.Vertovthencuts
to an editingroom,wherethe editor,Elizavetasvilova,Vertov'swife,as-
semblesstripsoffilmthatrepresentthiseventintothesequencewe have,
126 I INTRODUCTION TO DOCUMENTARY
SurnameVietGivenNaneNan(TrinhT.Minh-ha1989)PhotoscourtesyofTrinhT.Minh-ha
Make-upandcostumeareamorefrequentconsiderationIordocumentaryfilmmakersthanwe
mightassumeHerefilmmakerTrinhT.Minh-hapreparesactressTranThiBichYenforascene
whereshewillplayanintervieweedescribingherlifeinVietnamTheinterviewappearstobeset
inVietnambutwasactuallyshotinCalifornialikeFarfronPoland,Ihislilmexplorestheques-
tionofhowtorepresentsituationsnotdirectlyavailabletothe{ilmmaker
presumably,just seen.The overallresultdeconstructsthe impressionof
unimpededaccesstorealityandinvitesusto reflectontheprocessbywhich
thisimpressionis itselfconstructedthroughediting.
Otherfilms,suchas DavidHotzman'sDiary(1968),NoLies(1973),and
DaughterRite(1978),representthemselves,ultimately,as disguisedfic-
tions.They relyon trainedactorsto deliverthe performanceswe initially
believeto betheself-presentatronof peopleengagedin everydaylife.Our
realizationofthisdeception,sometimesthroughhintsandcluesduringthe
film.or at theend.whenthecreditsrevealthefabricatednatureof the per-
formanceswe havewitnessed,promptsus to questionthe authenticityof
documentaryingeneral:what"truth"dodocumentariesrevealabouttheself;
howis itdifferentfroma stagedorscriptedperformance;whatconventions
promptus to believein the authenticityof documentaryperformance;and
howcanthisbeliefbe productivelysubverted?
Thereflexivemodeisthemostself-consciousandself-questioningmode
WhatTypes of DocumentaryAreThere? | 127

16. 'l()l tll)t{.,(,nl,tlt(,n Il(.,rlr:,1,rr:t.r,:;:,lo lltc wotkl, llrr.,rlrrlrly lo Irr)/trt()l){)l
r,u;t:,tv{'r'vrrlcrrr;c,llrc l)():;:;tl)tltlyol ttttll;1lttl;tlllclrtool, llrr, ,rrlr.rrrrr,ntqoxl
r;;rllronrl lrclwccrr;rl in(.loxicillirrxtgc ancl what it rcprc:;crrl:, ;rll llese no-
rronr;oorno undcr suspicion. That such notions can compcl fetishistic belief
l)rornptsthe reflexivedocumentaryto examinethe natureof suchbelief
rirtherthanattesttothevalidityofwhatisbelieved.At itsbest,reflexivedoc_
umentaryprodsthe viewerto a heightenedformof consciousnessabout
her relationto a documentaryand what it represents.Vertovdoesthisin
TheMan witha MoviecamerarodemonstratehowweconstructourKnowr-
edgeof the world;Bufrueldoesthis in LandwithoutBreadto satirizethe
presumptionsthat accompanysuch knowledge;Trinhdoes this in Re-
assemblageto questionthe assumptionsthat underriea givenbody of
knowledgeor modeofinquiry(ethnography),aschris Markerdoesin sans
soleilloquestiontheassumptionsthatunderlietheactof makingfilmsof
the livesof othersin a worlddividedby racialand politicalboundaries.
Achievinga heightenedformof consciousnessinvolvesa shiftin levels
ofawareness.Reflexivedocumentarysetsoutto readjusttheassumptrons
andexpectationsof itsaudience,notadd newknowledgeto existingcate_
gories.Forthis reason,documentariescan be reflexivefrom bothformal
and politicalperspectives.
Froma formalperspective,reflexivitydrawsour attentionto our as-
ationeffects,"or whatthe Russianformaliststermedostranenie,or,,mak_
ingstrange."Thisissimilartothesurrealisteffortto seetheeverydayworld
rnunexpectedways.As a formalstrategy,makingthe familiarstrangere-
mindsus howdocumentaryworksas a filmgenrewhoseclaimsaboutthe
worldwe can receivetoo unthinkingly;as a politicalstrategy,it remindsus
howsocietyworksinaccordwithconventionsandcodeswe mavtooread-
ilytakeforgranted.
Theriseoffeministdocumentariesinthe1970sprovidesa vividexample
of the worksthatcallsocialconventionsintoquestion.Filmssuchas rhe
woman'sFilm(1971),JoyceatThirty-four(1972),andGrowinglJpFemate
(1970)followedmostof theconventionsof participatorydocumentary,but
theyalsosoughtto producea heightenedconscrousnessaboutdiscrimi-
nationagainstwomeninthecontemporaryworld.Theycountertheprevailing
(stereotypical)imagesofwomenwithradicallydifferentrepresentationsand
displacethehopesanddesiresfueledandgratifiedbyadvertisingandmelo-
128 I INTRODUCTION TO DOCUMENTARY
s'""'W.
weddingcanels(DauidandJudithMacDougall,1980)PhotocourtesyofDavidMacDougall
Inthistrilogyo{filmsontheTurkanaolnorthernKenya,DavidandJudithMacDougalladopt
severalreflexivestrategiestomakeusawareo{the{ilmmakers'activeinvolvementinsnapingtne
scenes14reseeSometimesttlsaquestionputbythelilmmakersthalpromptsdiscussion,some
timesitiswrittentitlesthatremindusolthecomplexprocessolrepresentlngmembers0tanotner
culturelnaformmemberso{anEnglish-speakingculturecanunderstandSuchreflexiveacts
wererareatthetimeinethnographlclilmManysuch{ilmswanttogivetheimpressionNanaok
oftheNarthgave:wewitnesscustomsandbehaviorasthey"naturally"occur,nolasaresultot
interactionbetween{ilmmakerandsubject
dramaswiththe experiencesand demandsof womenwho haverejected
thesenotionsin favorof radicallydifferentones.Suchfilmschallengeen-
trenchednotionsof thefeminineandalsoserveto givenameto whathad
laininvisible:theoppresston,devalorization,andhierarchythatcannowbe
calledsexism.Individualexperiencescombineintocommonperceptions:
a newwayof seeing,a distinctperspectiveon the socialorder,emerges.
"Alienation"fromprevailingassumptionsmayhavea formalorcinematic
component,butitisalsoheavilysocialor politicalin itsimpact.Ratherthan
provokingour awarenessprimarilyof form,politicallyreflexivedocumen-
tariesprovokeour awarenessof socialorganizationandthe assumptions
WhatTypes ot DocumentaryAreThere? | 129

17. !
CarpusAHomeMovieforSelena(Lourdes
Portillo,1999)PhotocourtesyofLourdes
Portillo
DirectorLourdesPortillolnvestigatesthe
repercussionsthatfollowedfromthemurderof
thepopularTex-lVlexsingerSelenaWasshea
positiverolemodelforyoungwomenwholearn
tochannellheirenergiesintobecomingpopu-
larsingers,orwassheherselfayoungwoman
encouragedtorecyclestereotypicalimagesof
femalesexuality?PortiIlodoesnoIanswersuch
queslionssomuchasposetheminanengag-
ingwayShedoessopartlybyshootinginvideo
tocreateafamilyportraitofSelenaandher
legacy
thatsupportit.Theytend,therefore,to inducean "aha!"effect,wherewe
graspa principleorstructureatworkthathelpsaccountforwhatwouldoth-
erwisebe a representationof morelocalizedexperience.Insteadwe take
a deeperlook.Politicallyreflexivedocumentariesacknowledgethe way
thingsarebutalsoinvokethewaytheymightbecome.Ourheightenedcon-
scrousnessopensupa gapbetweenknowledgeanddesire,betweenwhat
isandwhatmightbe.Politicallyreflexivedocumentariespointto usasview-
ers and socialactors,notlo films,as the agentswho can bridgethisgap
betweenwhatexistsandthe newformswe can makefromit.
THE PERFORMATIVE MODE
Likethepoeticmodeofdocumentaryrepresentation,theperformativemode
raisesquestionsaboutwhatis knowledge.Whatcountsas understanding
or comprehension?Whatbesidesfactualinformationgoesintoourunder-
130 I INTRODUCTION TO DOCUMENTARY
,,1;rrrrlrtttl0lllrl! worIl '1.,lilr]wlr)(l(lolrtll;l rltll;t;tillotl ;r:;;tIrl;ttilcl ;ttltltlt:;cttl
lrotliOtl,llltl;rtrl()tt(lr'tt{'t;tltz,tllotll; itrtd the typical, irl tltc"lrirdilitltl <lfWtll;lcttt
lrlrrlosophy'/ or r:t krrowkXk;tl bctter described as concretc and embodicd'
lrrsedon thespccitit;iticsof personalexperience,in thetraditionof poetry'
lrtoralure,and rhetoric?Performativedocumentaryendorsesthe latterpo-
.,rtionand setsoutto demonstratehowembodiedknowledgeprovidesen-
rryintoan understandingofthemoregeneralprocessesat workin society.
Meaningisclearlyasubjective,affect-ladenphenomenon'Acarorgun'
lrospitalol.p"r.on willbeardifferentmeaningsfordifferentpeople.Experi-
{)nceanctmemory,emotionalinvolvement,questionsof valueand belief,
()ommitmentandprincipleallenterintoourunderstandingofthoseaspects
0ftheworldmostoftenaddressedbydocumentary:theinstitutionalframe-
work(governmentsandchUrches,familiesandmarriages)andspecificso-
r;ia|practices(|oveandWar,competitionandcooperation)thatmaKeupa
:;ociety(asdiscussedinchapter4).Performativedocumentaryunderscores
thecomplexityof ourknowledgeoftheworldbyemphasizingitssubjective
;rndaffectivedimensions.
WorksIikeMar|onRiggs,sTongueslJntied(1989),Ngozionwurah,slhe
BodyBeautiful(1991),andMarlonFuentes'sBontocEulogy(1995)stress
tneemotionalcomplexityof experiencefrom the perspectiveof the film-
makerhim-orherself.An autobiographicalnoteentersintothesefilmsthat
bearssimilarityto the diaristicmodeof participatoryfilmmaking.Perfor-
mativefilmsgiveaddedemphasistothesubjectivequalitiesof experience
andmemorythatdepartfromfactualrecounting'MarlonRiggs'for exam-
ple,makesuseof recitedpoemsandenactedscenesthataddressthe in-
tensepersonalstakesinvolvedin black,gayidentity;onwurah'sfilmbuilds
uptoastagedsexua|encounterbetweenherownmotherandahandsome
youngman;and Fuentesenactsa fantasyabouthisgrandfather'sescape
fromcaptivrtyas an objectof displayatthe 1904St.LouisWorld'sFair'Ac-
tualoccurrencesDecomeamplifiedby imaginedones.The freecombina-
tionof the actualandthe imaginedis a commonfeatureof the performa-
tivedocumentarY.
Whatthesefilmsandotherssuchas lsaacJulien'sLookingforLangston
(1988),aboutthe lifeof LangstonHughes,or Julien'sFrantzFanon:Black
skin/white Mask (1996),aboutthe lifeof FrantzFanon;LarryAndrews's
videoBlackand sitver Horses(1992),about issuesof race and identity;
RobertGardner'sForestof Blis.s(1985),aboutfuneralpracticesinBenares,
india;ChrisChoyandReneeTajima,sWhoKittedVincentChin?(1988),
aboutthe murderof a chineseAmericanbytwoout-of-workautoworkers
who reportedlymistookhimforJapanese;ReaTajiri'sHistoryand Memory
(1991),abouthereffortsto learnthestoryof herfamily'sinternmentin de-
WhatTypes of DocumentaryAre There? | 131

18. flftlttlttrtl(iilllll)i;tlttttttt;wotlt.lwi rt ll;irrtrll,titltllltirl,ilrrr,rr':, llttt:;lt(lIx)l),
ilboutbcillgAsiarl-tsritislttrndgay,sttareisa deflectiorroltkrr;rrrrr6rrtarryem-
phasisawayfroma realistrepresentationofthehistoricalworldandtoward
poeticliberties,moreunconventionarnarrativestructures,and moresuD_jectiveformsof representation.The referentiarqualityof documentaryrhat
atteststo its functionas a windowontothe worrdyierdsto an expressrve
qualitythataffirmsthehighrysituated,embodied,
"no
uiuiotypersonarper_
spectiveof specificsubjects,includingthefilmmaker.
Eversinceat reastrurksib(192g),sattfor svanetia(1g30),and,in a
satiricvein,LandwithoutBread(1932),documentaryhasexhibitedmany
pedormativequarities,buttheyseldomhaveservedtoorganizeentirefilms.
Theywerepresentbutnotdominant.Someparticipatorydocumentariesof
the .1980s,
suchas LasMadresde raptazade Mayo(r9g5) and Rosesin
December(1982),incrudeperformativemomentsthat drawus intosub_jective,"asif" renderingsof traumaticpastevents(the,,disappearance,,of
thesonof oneof themotherswhoprotestedgovernmentrepressioninAr-
gentinaand the rapeof Jean Donovanandthreeotherwomenby Ersar-
vadoranmilitarymenrespectivery),buttheorganizingdominanttothefirms
revorvesarounda linearhistorythat includestheseevents.performative
documentariesprimariryaddressus,emotionailyand expressivery,rather
thanpointingus to thefactualworldwe holdin common.
Thesefirmsengageus resswith rhetoricarcommandsor imperatives
thanwitha senseof theirown vividresponsiveness.The firmmaker,sre_
sponsrvenessseeksto animateour own.we engagewiththeirrepresen_
tationofthehistoricalworrdbutdosoobliquely,viatheaffectivechargethey
applyto it and seekto maxeourown
Tonguesuntied,forexampre,beginswitha voice-overcailthatricochets
fromleftand right,in stereo,"Brotherto Brother,,',,Brotherto Brother.. . ,,,andendswitha decraration,"Brackmenrovingbrackmenistherevorutionary
act."Thecourseofthefirmovera seriesof decrarations,reenactments,po_
eticrecitations,andstagedperformancesthatailattestto thecomprexities
of racialandsexuarrelationswithingaysubcurturestrivesto animateusto
adoptthepositionof "brother"forourserves,at reastforthedurationof the
film.we are invitedto experiencewhatit is riketo occupythe subjective,
socialpositionof a brack,gaymare,suchas MarronRiggshimserf.
Justas a feministaestheticmaystriveto moveaudiencemembers,re_
gardlessof theiractuargenderand sexuarorientation,intothe subjective
positionofa feministcharacter'sperspectiveontheworld,per{ormativedoc_
umentaryseeksto moveits audienceintosubjectivearignmentor affinity
withitsspecificperspectiveon theworrd.Likeearrierworkssuchas Listen
to Britain(1941),on resistanceto Germanbombingby the Britishpeopre
132 I INTRODUCTION TO DOCUMENTARY
An$ela J6ndsll, from the House of Jendell walking as fuluristic
l0nrm€ queen
Pllf_slt(;l
ParislsBurning(JennyLivingston1991)
ParislsBurningentersintoadistinct,black,gaysub-cultureinwhichyoungmenclusterinto
"houses,"whichcompeteagainsteachotherinvariouscategoriesofmimicryanddragat"balls"
0rganizedpartlytoexplainthissub-culturetononparticipants,PailslsBurningalsoimmersesus
performativelyinthequalityandtextureolthisworldtoadegreethal16inWebsterGrovesor
DeadBirdsdoesnoI
duringWorldWar ll, or ThreeSongsof Lenin(1934),on the mourningof
Lenin'sdeathbytheSovietpeople,recentperformativedocumentariestry
to giverepresentationto a socialsubjectivitythatjoinsthe generalto the
particular,the individualto the collective,andthe politicalto the personal.
Theexpressivedimensionmaybe anchoredto particularindividuals,butit
extendsto embracea social,or shared,formof subjectiveresponse.
In recentwork thissocialsubjectivityis oftenthat of the underrepre-
sentedor misrepresented,of womenand ethnicminorities,gaysand les-
bians.Performativedocumentarycanactasa correctivetothosefilmswhere
"Wespeakaboutthemto usJ'Theyproclaim,instead,that"Wespeakabout
WhatTypes of DocumentaryAreThere? | 133

19. olll:i()lvoi; lo yotl," ()l "Wo lil)oilk itl)oul oUljolvc:; l, l*," l,rrrl()',illtvo (Joc
tltttottlitrysll;trt:sit tcbttlitttcittgandcorrectiveterrrlcrrr;ywrllrlrrrtorethnog-
raphy(ethnographicallyinlormedworkmadeby membersof thecommu-
nitieswhoarethetraditionarsubjectsofwesternethnography,suchas the
numeroustapesmadebytheKayapopeopreoftheAmazonriverbasinand
by the Aboriginalpeopleof Australia).lt doesnot,however,countererror
withfact,misinformationwithinformation,butadoptsa distinctmodeof reo_
resentationthatsuggestsknowredgeandunderstandingrequireanentirery
differentformof engagement.
Likeearlydocumentary,beforetheobservationarmodepracedpriority
on the directfirmingof sociarencounter,performativedocumentaryfreery
mixesthe expressivetechniquesthat givetextureand densityto fiction
(point-of-viewshots,musicalscores,renderingsofsubjectivestatesofmind,
flashbacksandfreezeframes,etc.)withoratoricaltechniquesforaddress-
ingthesocialissuesthatneithersciencenorreasoncan resorve.
Pedormativedocumentaryapproachesthe domainof experimentaror
avant-gardecinemabutgives,finaily,ressemphasisto the serf-contained
qualityof the film or video than to its expressivedimensionin retationto
representationsthatreferus backto the historicalworldfor theirultimate
meaning.we continueto recognizethehistoricalworldby meansof famil_
iarpeopleandpraces(LangstonHughes,Detroitcityscapes,thesan Fran-
cisco Bay Bridge,and so on), the testimonyof others(participantsin
Tonguesuntied whodescribethe experiencesof brack,gay men;the per-
sonalvoice-overconfidencesof Ngozionwurahabouther relationshioto
her motherin TheBodyBeautiful);and scenesbuirtaroundparticipatory
or observationarmodesof representation(interviewswithvariouspeopre
in Khushand lh Britishbut.. .; observedmomentsof dairy ritein Forest
of Bliss).
The world as representedby performativedocumentariesbecomes,
however,suffusedby evocativetonesand expressiveshadingsthatcon-
stantlyremindusthattheworldismorethanthesumofthevisioleevidence
we derivefromit.Anotherearry,partiarexampreof the performativemooe,
AlainResnais'sNightandFog(1955),abouttheHorocaust,makesthispoint
vividly.The film'svoice-overcommentaryand imagesof iilustrationnomi_
nateNightandFogtortheexpositorymode,butthehaunting,personarquar-
ityofthecommentarymovesittowardthepedormative.Theiilm isressabout
historythanmemory,ressabouthistoryfromabove-what happenedwhen
andwhy-and moreabouthistoryfromberow-whatonepersonmightex-
peflenceand what it mightfeelliketo undergothat experience.Through
the elliptic,evocativetoneof the commentaryby Jean cayror,a survivor
of Auschwitz,Nightand Fogsets out to representthe unrepresentabre:
134 I INTRODUCTION TO DOCUMENTARY
NightandFoglNuitetbrouillardl(AlainResnais1955)
MuchofthefootagepresentedinNightandFogwasshotbyconcentrationcampofficers,then
discoveredalterthewarbytheAlliesAlainResnaiscompilesthisfootageintoasearingtestim
tothehorrorsofinhumanityHislilmofferslarmorethanvisualevidenceofNaziatrocitiesIturges
ustoremember,andneverforget,whathappenedlongagointhesecampsltlinksthepasttothe
presentandgivestomemorytheburdenofsustainingamoralconscience
the sheerinconceivabilityof actsthatdefyall reasonand all narrativeor-
der.Visibleevidenceabounds-of belongingsandbodies,of victimsand
survivors-but thevoiceof Nightand Fogextendsbeyondwhatevidence
confirms:itcallsforanemotionalresponsivenessfromusthatacknowledges
howunderstandingthiseventwithinanypre-establishedframeof reference
isan utterimpossibility(evenaswe mayarriveat ajudgmentoftheheinous
monstrosityof suchgenocide).
In a similarspirit,HungarianfilmmakerP6terForgdcshasdescribed
hisgoalasnotto polemicize,nottoexplain,notto argueorjudge,so much
asto evokea senseofwhatpastexperienceswerelikeforthosewholived
them.His extraordinarydocumentariesare madefrom homemoviesre-
organizedintoperformativerepresentationsof the socialturmoilcaused
byworld war ll: Free Fall(1998),recountsthe lifeof a successfulJewish
businessmanin the 1930s,GyorgyPeto,who is eventuallycaughtup in
WhatTypes of DocumentaryAre There? | 135

20. FreeFall(P1terForg6cs,1998)photoscourtesyofpeterForgacs
P6terForgilcsreliesentirelyonfoundfootage,inthiscase,homemoviesfromtheig30sand
1940ssuchfootagerevealslifeasitwasseenandexperiencedatagiventimeForg6csreworks
thefootage,croppingimages,slowingdownmotion,addingtitlesandmusic,tocombineasense
ofhistoricalperspecttvewithaformofemotionalengagementTheresultisquitepoetic,radicarry
differentintonefromtheclassicworldwarlldocumentariesinanexpositorymodesuchasthe
WhyWeFightseries
( ictrtlttty':; rllr t,,rrrr l,rl. rrr lltc witt, lo ;rllply llttltt "lttt;tl l;olttltott" lo Iltltt
(lilrlilt,fgw: ,,,trll It,rttrtltr,l xotlLts(1999) tells t-rlthe lorcod ttttqrltltotts oI
.ktws dowtt lltc l);rttttlrc tttt route to Palestine, in the faCe of British resis-
lilncetothc irrrrvirlol any more refugees, and of Germanswhoflee upriver
lrom Romaniabackto Germanywhenthe Sovietarmydrivesthemfrom
theirland.Thefilmreliesprimarilyon homemoviestakenbythecaptainof
;r Danubecruiseshipinvolvedin transportingbothof thesegroups.
DanubeExodusmakesno attemptto tell the overallhrstoryof world
war ll. By focusingon thesespecificevents,seenfromtheviewpointof a
participantratherthana historian,Forgdcssuggestssomething,however,
aboutthe overalltoneof the war:he suggestshow,for someparticipants,
thewar was primarilyan enormousfluxof peoples,in and out of various
countries,for a widevarietyof reasons.Lossoccurs,alongwith disloca-
tion.The war takesitstoll notfrom bombsalonebutfromthesecasesof
civilianexodusthattransformedthefaceof Europe.
ForgScswantsto leaveevaluationandjudgmentto us butalsoto post-
ponethiskindof reflectionwhilewe experiencea moredirectlysubjective
encounterwiththesehistoricalevents.He invokesaffectovereffect,emo-
tionoverreason,notto rejectanalysisandjudgmentbutto placethemon
a differentbasis.LikeResnais,Vertov,and Kalatozovbeforehim,and like
so manyof hiscontemporaries,Forgdcssidestepsready-madepositions
and prefabricatedcategories.He invitesus, as all greatdocumentarians
do,to see the worldafreshand to rethinkour relationto it. Pedormative
documentaryrestoresa senseof magnitudeto the local,spectfic,andem-
bodied.lt animatesthepersonalso thatit maybecomeourportof entryto
thepolitical.
We can summarizethisgeneralsketchof the six modesof documen-
taryrepresentationinthefollowingtable.Documentary,liketheavant-garde,
beginsin responseto fiction.(Thedatesin thistablesignifywhena mode
Oecomesa commonalternative;each modehas predecessorsand each
continuesto thisday.)
WhatTypes of DocumentaryAreThere? | 137

21. lrrlrhr(i I
DocurnentaryModes
ClriefCharacteristics
-Deficiencres
Hollywoodfiction [1910s]:fictionalnarrativesof imaginaryworlds
-absence of',reality,'
Poetic documentary llg2osl: reassembrefragmentsof the
worldpoetically
-lack of specificity,tooabstract
Expository documentary [192Os]:direcilyaddressissues
inthehistoricalworld
-overlydidactic
ObservationaI documentaryl1960sl:eschewcom_
mentaryand reenactment;observethingsas
theyhappen
-lack of history,context
Participatory documentary [196Os]: interview
or Interactwithsubjects;usearchivalfilm
to retrievehistory
-excessivefaithinwitnesses,naive
history,toointrusive
Reflexive documentary [1980s]:ques_
tiondocumentaryform,defamilrarrze
theothermodes
-too abstract,losesightofac_
tualrssues
Pertormativedocumentary[1g8Os]:stresssubjectiveaspectsof a
classicallyobjectivediscourse
-toss ofemphasison objectivitymayrelegatesuchfilms
to theavant-garde;',excessive',useofstyle.
Chapter7
HowHaveDocumentariesAddressed
SocialandPoliticallssues?
PEOPLE AS VICTIMS OR AGENTS
Whenwe firstasked"Whatto do withpeople?"in Chapter1, our discus-
r;ionfellprimarilywithinan ethicalframe.Whatconsequencesfollowfrom
rlifferentformsof responseto andengagementwithothers?Howmaywe
representor speak aboutotherswithoutreducingthem to stereotypes,
lrawns,or victims?Thesequestionsallowfeweasyanswers,buttheyalso
suggestthatthe issuesare notethicalalone.To act unethicallyor to mis-
representothersinvolvespoliticsand ideologyas well.
In a harshcritiqueof the documentarytradition,especiallyas repre-
sentedby televisionjournalism,BrianWinstonarguesthat 1930sdocu-
mentaryfilmmakersin GreatBritaintooka romanticviewof theirworking-
classsubjects;theyfailedto seethe workeras an active,self-determining
agentof change.Instead,the workersufferedfrom a "plight"that others,
namelygovernmentagencies,shoulddo somethingabout.
HousingProblems(1935),forexample,gaveslumdwellerstheoppor-
tunitytospeakforthemselves,ina synchronoussoundinterviewformatset
withintheirown homes.The wordsof actualworkersappearedon British
screensfor the firsttime,a sensationalachievementin the dayslongbe-
foretelevisionor realityTV.Buttheyappearedas if theycamewithhat in
ll
138 I INTRODUCTION TO DOCUMENTARY
139