Comparing Apples and Oranges

 Shaelene G. Moler

Prof. Richard Simpson

History and Theory of Documentary Film

28 October 2020

                                                                            Comparing Apples and Oranges

As one of the class leader’s this week, I really delved deep into what the critical arguments of these films, and their makers are. Wiseman, was a man who believed that the camera interfered with the authenticity of documentary film, and filmed his movie High School using the Direct Cinema method. Whereas, Roche believed that the camera drawn out more authentic responses from his subjects, and filmed his movie Chronicle of a Summer with the Catalyst Cinema method, largely inspired by Vertov.

Although I enjoyed both poems, I found myself drawn to each of them for vastly different reasons. With High School, I was drawn to the movies structure, and political commentary (or lack thereof), and with Chronicle of a Summer, I found myself drawn to the individual characters because of the depths in which they were explored, and how their reflections (including the filmmakers) at the end added to the final product. Overall, I feel like both of these men’s positions bring value to the documentary film genre, and it does not feel right to pit their ideas against one another, simply because of the fact that they offer different types of authenticity. 

Direct Cinema, at least from what we saw this week, displays people in their natural world, without the director/ ethnographer/ filmmaker interfering or interacting. It allows the viewer to see things as they are, and even allows the subject to see themselves in that state, although this is also true of Catalyst Cinema. Catalyst Cinema, on the other hand, occurs when both the camera and the filmmaker are directly involved with the subject, and it typically involves interviews. Catalyst Cinema is well known for drawing out people’s deeper emotions, and presenting them in a raw format, fully acknowledged by the subject. In many instances, it is almost like a form of therapy.

That being said, I would have to say I have an appreciation for both forms of documentary film, and I don’t believe that they should be compared on the same level.

 Jeff Holley

ENGL 342

Prof. Richard Simpson

October 28, 2020

 

Cinema of Truth

 

The ushering in the new handheld camera with the sound capability built in the '60s became a new era for observational film documentaries.  The idea started in the mid-fifties with films like Lionel Rogosin's On The Bower (1956), where the filmmaker follows a decent looking younger alcoholic who struggles on the streets of New York, coasting from shelters, cheap hotels, and the sidewalk trying to get a grip of his life (Barnouw, 234). Rogosin's film, although heavily scripted, set a stage for the future. The cinema Vérité found its way into documentarist exploration when the French filmmaker Jean Rouch and sociologist Edgar Morin created Chronicles of Summer (1961).  This two-hour unscripted film questionnaire asked the simple question, "are you happy," which was tremendously successful as it turned out. The new style went further than just the "fly on the wall" documentary. This film documentary engaged its subjects and explored the provocative questions in real-time. In one moment, a middle-aged French man smoking a cigarette, who knows he's being filmed and talking into the camera, says, "happiness, unhappiness, it shouldn't be in the dictionary." The film's people became the film, the footage was raw and lacked the cinematic qualities of lighting and stability in the shots, but that was part of the charm that made it so successful. 

HighSchool (1968), by Fredrick Wiseman, was another shining example of this documentary freestyle cinematography that on a high school campus filmed interactions of teachers, the principle of the school along with the students to capture the essence of what it was like to be in school during that era. The authoritative, demanding nature of the principle and a conversation with a student who didn't want to go to the gym class says, "do you get dressed in the morning?" "do you get undressed?" "then you can go to gym class," he said. The awareness that these faculty members and students of the camera and being filmed was apparent; however, the magnitude and dialogue were real. That's what made it so exciting and watchable.

 

 Jeff Holley

Richard Simpson

ENGL 342

Oct 21, 2020

 

Cinema after the Second World War

 

 

The birth of the "Neorealist" movement, brought about by several of the unemployed former documentarists who once worked for the government agencies mostly around Europe and the US, found a rekindling of their cinematic approach evolving from making war propaganda films to something more palatable. Sidney Meyers was one of these filmmakers; a Photo League Veteran was one of the great ones (Barnouw, 185). this neorealist cinematic movement also included the post-war Shoeshine, a post-war film depicting two boys and their life and demise in the boys' prison for their involvement in a burglary. Such films gave a different understanding of the world but probably had poor connectivity to what we would typically classify as a documentary these days. 

One phenomenon was the "short film odes" that started in the middle of the second world war by Swedish filmmakers looking to change this tragic subject.  The possibility of being accused of sympathizing with the wrong side of "nervous" neutrality and getting unwanted attention from neighboring war spies bent on finding incriminating material in such films might create unwanted scrutiny against them to incite public awareness. (186) these films about nature become widely popular during and after the war, leading to other post-war trends. 

After the war, an exciting trend of independent filmmaking resulted from economic prosperity and the traumatic public scaring left on the minds of the public artists like Bert Haanstra, filmed alone and created a sort of class of world wanderers (193). These films typically shot with poetry in mind, and the contrasting of industrialized nations competed in a "cold war" productivity competition between the capitalists and the soviet bloc (194).

Reminiscent of Comolli and Narboni

 Shaelene Moler

Prof. Richard Simpson

History and Theory of Documentary film

October 14, 2020

        Reminiscent of Comolli and Narboni

As with nearly every film and reading in this course, to me, a lot of this week’s study content seems to be reminiscent of the teachings of Comolli and Narboni’s Cinema/ Ideology/ Criticism. As we can remember from this reading, Comolli and Narboni’s primary argument was that every film is political, regardless of their contents. Having read this week’s Bill Nichol’s reading Documentary Film and the Modernist Avant-Garde, and watched Drifters, Night Mail, and The Quiet One, we not only see clear supporting arguments, but also examples of this political film argument. 

Starting with the Nichols reading, this reading has a strong emphasis on not only the political nature of documentary film, but also documentary films historical involvement in politics. One of the quotes that best represent this comes from Nichols’s argument on the nature of documentary film from page 582 which states “For advocates like Grierson, the value of cinema lay in its capacity to document, demonstrate, or, at most, enact the proper, or improper, terms of individual citizenship” (Nichols 582). To me, this single quote is entirely reminiscent of the quote from the Comolli and Narboni reading which reads “ So, when we set out to make a film from the very first shot, we are encumbering by the necessity of reproducing things not as they really are but as they appear when refracted through the ideology” (Comolli and Narboni 815). Since Comolli and Narboni have such a strong emphasis on reproduction based on ideology, I feel like Nichols statement that cinema has the capacity to document, demonstrate, or enact fits well with reproducing based on individual, or general interests or ideas. 

As for this week’s films, overall I feel like all three fell into one of two categories, if not both. The first film Drifters, for example, while it is documenting a process, it is also an argument for a social and financial necessity; whereas it’s companions Night Mail and The Quiet One encompass different parts of those two categories separately. Night Mail is a documentary on the process of train work and transportation, and The Quiet One tells the story of a boy named Donald to emphasize a social necessity, although it is debatable if it is an argument for correctional schools, or companionship. I believe that what makes these films political, as Comolli and Narboni discuss, would be how each of these films seem to enforce a dominant ideology, whether they are outward about it or not. Drifters and Night Mail, although documentaries on work processes, are examples of the dominant ideology of that time period, although they don’t actively argue for it. The Quiet One, on the other hand, openly discusses the main character Donald’s past struggles, as an enforcer of the narrators beliefs.

Jeff Holley

Richard Simpson

ENGL 342

October 13, 2020

 

Post Modernism and the Avant-Guard

 

The dreariness of these films, although debatable as visionary, it would depend on how the viewer would perceive the era where films like Drifter and the ushering in of a new narrated version of the documentary. This film gave Hollywood the distance to pursue something more educationally satisfying for the Grierson, but that set him apart from his predecessor Flaherty. 

If Flaherty, as considered by some, the first accidental documentarist filmmaker, John Grierson, took it to another level. Grierson initially pursued the relationship but held a “love-hate” relationship with Flaherty due to his primitive leanings of the films he produced, namely Moana, which when Grierson actually uses the term “documentary” in reference to Flaherty’s box office dud. (Barnouw, 88). 

Grierson had his growing agenda filming the North Sea herring fisherman and being English and having studied initially at Glasgow University. The University of Chicago, he returned to put his film career to use, cutting and shaping a narrative that, although silent, could capture a more dominant documentary presence. (Barnouw, 90). 

In the beginning, he describes the “brown sails” of the original fishing vessels and the open sea and small village from where the harbor was mostly vacant as the first scene, written out on screen. Then the shift to the hustle and bustle of black smoke billowing, steel controls, levers, and the regurgitating saltwater pushed the modern version of mariners back to the harbor to sell the enormous catch. 

The film depicts the miles of “log-line” used and the fact that despite the galley time cooking, measuring flour, when the lines are out, and the fishing starts, the deckhands are always working well into the night until the job is finished.  It’s a sad story of capitalism and the change from the smalltime sailor to the vast sea of vessels, all spewing smoke and contributing to the horror of a greedy society. It leads to fodder for future endeavors, which Grierson develops his life-long career to become the father of documentary.

More Questioning of Documentary Form

 Shaelene G. Moler

Prof. Richard Simpson

History and Theory of Documentary Film

7 October 2020

More Questioning of Documentary Form

After viewing the films for this week, I can honestly say that the two which stood out to me the most were Regen and A Propos de Nice. This is largely due to the fact that, to me, they display hugely different approaches to documentary film, and ultimately raise the question on where we draw the line for the documentary genre. 

In this week’s reading “Making Rain,” we get an inside look at the filmmaker Joris Iven’s philosophy behind making Regen. Although there were many quotes that caught my eye, the one that seems to explain Iven’s approach to documentary film best is “In Rain I consciously used heavy dark drops dripping in big pear-shaped forms at long intervals across the glass of the studio window to produce the melancholy feeling of a rainy day” (79). What this quote shows, is that documentary film is more than recording life as it happens, it is about recording life in a well-thought out, artistic way that displays the message or meaning you want to get across. Iven’s admits that this was an aspect of his film that he was most proud of with his discussion on how happy he was the audience searched for their raincoats after the films first screening only to be surprised it was not raining outside. 

As for A Propos de Nice, this was a film, that seemed to be more “thrown together” than Regen, if you consider the filmmakers philosophy behind it. In the reading of “A Propos de Nice” this week, Kaufman wrote “I don’t know whether the result will be a work of art, but I am sure it will be cinema. Cinema, in the sense that no other art, no science, can take its place” (82). Kaufman’s approach, in my interpretation, was more free form. He did not outline like Iven did, and instead shot what he felt was needed whether this was some sort of fantasy sequence, or a compare and contrast scene. The film, in a way, was formed out of Kaufman’s imagination and opinions. Whereas Iven’s Regen, was formed by rain, or so he claims.

That being said, when it comes to documentary film, I think that for the most part it is a form up to interpretation; meaning, what we consider documentary, may not be considered documentary to another person, with some exceptions. 

Documentary and Cinematic Expression

 Jeff Holley

Richard Simpson

ENGL 342

October 6, 2020

 

Documentary and Cinema

 

Upon introducing A Propos de Nice (1930),  by Jean Vigo, whose first Avant-Garde representation among spectators at the famous French theater, Vieux Columbier. "I don't know whether the result will be a work of art, but I am sure it will be cinema, in the sense that no other art, no science, can take its place" (82). 

Vigo adopted many of Vertov's ideas, whose younger brother, Boris Kaufman, was his photographer. Like in A Man with a Camera, they used Kino-Eye devices in their shots that depicted the rich and the poor's idle nature, the middle class, and all their roaring 20's attitude. (Barnouw, 72)

            Mysteriously, Vigo died in jail at 29 years of age (Barnouw, 74). Perhaps Vigo would have passed early anyway since his onset of tuberculosis led him to the warmer climate.  His whole purpose filming there and the ability assumed to pay for it by his father, a "radical journalist" from France's southern Basque region. 

Also, during the 20's the atmosphere among the artist's struggle against the commercialization of cinema was a new frontier that was quickly becoming volatile for the industry. The artists of every medium imaginable were concerned less with plot and script. Lighting was the new artistic medium for cinema and the concept that "all the arts are shaken by the rise of film" (Barnouw, 71). 

In Vigo's unconventional film, the shoe, the shoe shinner, and the contrast transition from shoe to a barefoot tell a rich and poor story. Alternatively, the same posed woman, as the dress repeatedly changes until the last woman, same pose but naked. Throughout the film, these devices, the advent-guard way of telling a story from the filmmaker's viewpoint is apparent, there is a story to tell, and it's useful. 

Other than the modes of documentary, i.e., the poetic, the expository, and the Reflexive Modes, all have different approaches to make cinema expressive and artistic in form and less about the plot and theatrical agendas that sell to audiences for money.  During this period, cinema was an artistic revolution or could have been more so having not the commercialization took place. 

These cinematic expressions, known now as documentaries, are about real people, social actors, and real stories (almost).  The new documentary cinematic film gifts a more subtle eye-level world-historical view from the filmmaker's perspective, allowing the audience to decide their interpretation (Nichols, 104). Now, that is cinema! 

 

~Jeff

 Kali Spencer

Richard Simpson

ENGL 342

10/07/20

The City Symphony

After having watched Manhatta by Paul Strand and Charles Sheeler (1921), Regen by Joris Ivens (1929), and A Propos de Nice by Jean Vigo (1930) I began to ask myself what the purpose of the city symphony was and what sort of message it was trying to convey to the audience. Upon first viewing, the film may appear to be nothing more than relatively still shots of a city over a period of time. After a deeper analysis though I’ve come to the conclusion that the city symphony is a style of documentary that, borrowing from other art forms, is able to represent the modernity and lived experiences of people at a certain place in time.

The city symphony seems to me to be a very avant-garde form of film making for the time it was being produced. Differing from other films at the time such as the silent films of Charlie Chaplain the city symphony follows a nontypical narrative with the city as the subject. By doing so and making the city itself the main focus of the film the directors are able to highlight the dynamism of metropolises around the world. 

    Due to the lack of narrative pacing, the films seem to borrow from the structure found in other art forms such as poetry and music. This is shown particularly well in the film Manhatta by Paul Strand and Charles Sheeler. The film is no doubt influenced by the poem Manhatta by Walt Whitman. Whitman’s poem is an ode to the city just as the film is. In highlighting different locations around the city, Strand and Sheeler are able to capture the intricacies and unique beauty that the city holds just as each line in Whitman’s poem does. This makes the film a form of visual poetry. In adopting the form of poetry the film has a sort of rhythm to it that mimics the internal rhythm and pulse of the city. In this way, the city symphony is a medium capable of presenting space and time in a novel manner that is true to the lived experiences of those living in the city.