1. Documentary as dialogue
A dialogue is a simple back and forth of ideas, a primary means of communication between two or more people – this is the basic format and premise for documentary work. Emphasizing the relevance of dialogues and the exchange of ideas reveals a fundamental level of human interaction rather than an action, or a single mode of expression. An assertion of this negotiation through a conscious putting forward and interpretation of a subject takes from both realist and rhetorical positions.
2. Place and context as construction within documentary
Representing a physical location or place establishes a context for documentary work, which should be clearly communicated; however, there also is the place that is manufactured by the artist within the work. Illustrating this point, Alan Trachtenberg writes about Walker Evan’s America Photographs:
“One is an actual physical site, where a shutter was released and a photographic exposure made; the other is an immaterial place, a physical book to be sure, but still, a place to be made up by the reader-viewer in the course of experiencing the book” (Trachtenberg,1984. 58).
The reality that is represented is a construction in whatever documentary work that is created.
3. A spelling out, documentary as advocacy and explanation
What should motivate the documentary maker is the need to raise consciousness, to take on the challenge of representing others and give voice to an issue. Martha Rosler describes this documentary impetus as she says:
“Explanation and advocacy are still viable in relation to photography, as in purely word-based journalism. Documentary’s best course, it seems to me, is to provide a balance between observing the situation of others and expressing one’s own point of view – which ought to include some form of analytical framework identifying social causes and proposing remedies” (Rosler, 2004. 240).
This social documentary approach is based in a grassroots or didactic desire to affect change, explain and point to the solution of a social issue.
4. Address the problem of speaking for others and the burden of representation
There is a responsibility to uphold the positioning of others when expressing or communicating their voice. Linda Alcoff writes about the connectedness of “speaking about” to the weighty “crisis of representation” prevalent in visual culture and critical theory:
“In both the practice of speaking for as well as the practice of speaking about others, I am engaging in the act of representing the other’s needs, goals, situation, and in fact, who they are. I am representing them as such and such, or in post-structuralist terms, I am participating in the construction of their subject-positions” (Alcoff, 1992. 9).
Here the deeper political ramifications of representation are realized as individuals’ identities and situations can be greatly effected and altered by documentary work. Be conscious of the emancipatory or oppressive consequences for those represented and make this consciousness evident in the work.
5. Do not have any absolute principles of documentary
Be open to surprises and follow the subject or situation as it unfolds. Preconceived notions can limit the potential of the work. Stella Bruzzi notes this point as she quotes Marcel Ophuls saying, “I think that part of a documentary filmmaker’s business is not to have any absolute principles, otherwise he closes too many doors in advance” (Bruzzi, 2006. 106). Being open to the journey of the documentary process, or final product that is an account of this development or unraveling, is extremely important.
6. Take from ethnographic or anthropological models of enquiry
Documentary works should move horizontally from issue to issue. Hal Foster explains this horizontal investigation as being “…consistent with the ethnographic turn in art and criticism: one selects a site, enters its culture and learns its language, conceives and presents a project, only to move to the next site where the cycle is repeated” (Foster, 1996. 202). Framing documentary in this way allows the social and site specific layers of the study to be considered from a thorough and focused perspective.
7. Recreate and perform; this should be the heart of documentary
To reenact or recreate is an important strategy for documentary practices. Navigating the crisis of representation and the challenge to illustrate a given reality is incredibly difficult, so the role of performance and performative documentaries provides a method of alluding to the issues underlying the surface of the subject matter. Stella Bruzzi writes:
“Alternatively, the use of performance tactics could be viewed as a means of suggesting that perhaps documentaries should admit the defeat of their utopian aim and elect instead to present an alternative ‘honesty’ that does not seek to mask their inherent instability but rather to acknowledge that performance – the enactment of the documentary specifically for the cameras – will always be the heart of the non-fiction film” (Bruzzi, 2006. 187).
8. Documentary should avoid aesthetic objectification
When photographs, videos, films, or a realistic representation of an individual or subject matter are considered only for their beauty or for a superficial value the identity, context, and the social motivations for why the work was created can be lost. And most troubling, the subject can be exploited through the artist profiting from their image. To avoid this issue, give voice to the individuals represented, explain the context and process you (the artist) have gone through to ensure that those represented are fairly and honestly described. The market place or aesthetic styles should not determine the final product of documentary production.
9. Stress interpretation and ambiguity (documentary is art)
While aesthetic objectification is something that should be avoided, creating art is not to be written off when creating documentary work. Art and documentary works are inevitably interpretations of subject matter and reflect the subject-positioning of the artist. This ambiguous blend of the ‘real,’ the subject, the place, the people/person, and the maker is what makes documentary works so captivating – there are various perspectives to tease apart.
Works Cited
Alcoff, Linda. “The Problem of Speaking for Others” Cultural Critique. 0882-4371 (winter 1991-92).
Bruzzi, Stella. New Documentary, London and New York: Routledge, 2006.
Foster, Hal. “The Artist as Ethnographer” The Return of the Real: The Avant-garde at the End of the Century. Cambridge and London: The MIT Press, 1996.
Rosler, Martha. “Post-Documentary, Post-Photography” Decoys and Disruptions: Selected Writings, 1975-2001. Cambridge and London: MIT Press, 2004.
Trachtenberg, Alan. “Walker Evans’ America: A Documentary Invention” David Feathersone Ed. Observations: Essays on Documentary Photography. Carmel, California: Friends of Photography, 1984.
