"Anthropology in Arabic"
Today we will discuss "Visual Anthropology"
It is ,like I said before, Documentary films and photography
that translates the anthropological studies about these cultures.
Generally, the interested researcher is also the filmmaker.
I want to start with two visual ethnographers that we can describe as "relationship goals"!
In the 1960s they studied ethnographic documentary film making
And they feel in love, and got married shortly after they graduated.
This love story brought to us many documentary films
mainly in Africa and Australia.
Before going on with their story and work,
I want to remind you that Visual Anthropology, is generally done when
the anthropologist/filmmaker go to the people he/she wants to study or document
and stays with them, enough time that he/she could know enough about them
and present them well in his/her films or photography.
There is also an important concept called "Reflexivity"
And it is important in documentary or in arts in general
where the artists and the audience come with their personal histories and perceptions.
And this is why when we watch any artwork,
each of us perceive it personally and differently.
This is also why it makes a different to watch it on your own or in
company and with people, followed with a discussion .
Back to the love Birds, Judith and David
They wrote a lot of articles about documentary filmmaking and visual ethnography
They also did a lot of important films.
David himself thou says that the difference between the names "visual ethnography" and "documentary films"
is blurry. So one could most of the time use them interchangeably.
I have listed down some important films done by David and Judith Macdougall.
But there is a film I want to specify, which is important and interesting; "Photo Wallahs"
Where they explored the cultural and personal meanings of photographs
in a hill station in northern India.
Before moving on, an Important Word I want to note;
If you are a documentarist,
PLEASE
Don't document your subjects with superiority, do not patronize them, Please!
This makes me remind you about next episode
"A Culture for Sale"
Back to Documentary Filmmaking
There are many types of ethnographic documentary films
When I say "Ethnography", I depend on that you watched Episode 2 and already know what it is.
But in case you do not remember, it is the cultural analysis/description done by an anthropologist.
Mainly, some documentary films are Participatory and some are Observational.
What?
Participatory includes involvement and engagement,
there is a presence of the filmmaker, sometimes he/she is featured in the film.
And there is a certain narration to the film, via voice over, being featured or editing.
This is what an important visual anthropologist do; Jean Rouch
He is considered to be the father of visual anthropology - and I listed his films below.
Rouch, interestingly, cared a lot about "Reflexivity" that
I spoke about earlier in the episode.
He even records a feedback session with the subjects documented.
as they watch the film, and he adds this segment to the film itself for the public.
Similarly, Robert Flaherty, the director of "Nanook of the North"
also let Nanook, himself be the first to watch the film.
Nanook was the main character of his ethnographic film on indigenous people of Canada.
This film is a classic, you should watch if you are interested.
It is old, since 1922, but is important!
In Participatory filmmaking, the camera is like an extension of the director's eyes.
This is why there is an interaction between the subjects and the camera.
Because it feels like they are communicating with the filmmaker, and
to us, those who watch the film through the filmmaker's or the photographer's eyes.
This could be seen in Tahani Rachid's film,
In her film "El Banat Dol" "These Girls" which speaks about
street girls in Cairo.
These girls were speaking to the camera as if they were venting out to us, the audience.
Participatory is my favourite, [if you care to know]
Then there is the Observational Filmmaking, which is
literally the camera just observing.
It doesn't feel like an extension of the photographer/filmmaker's eyes anyways,
There is no narration, no voice over, or
any story commentary from the filmmaker/photographer.
He places the camera in a certain position, and we watch what happens.
Subjects generally then know that they shouldn't look at or communicate with the camera.
There is a film [linked below] and is a good example of observational cinema
Which is "Sisters in Law"
The directer was filming the stories of humble women in Cameron who were filing divorce/violence cases.
One could feel that the camera was put in the court room or the lawyer's office as if it is not there at all.
No one looks at it, but we get to see what is happening from away.
There is no engagement between subjects and the camera.
And then, another type is the "Sensory",
used when the filmmaker emphasizes a lot a certain sense, something to be heard, felt or remembered.
And this is what is called "Sensory filmmaking"
For instance, there is a film called "Leviathan",
which attempts to do an ethnography about mass fishing on a big boat that spends nights in the midst of the sea.
Here the camera is the farthest to be an extended eye of the filmmaker, or even of a human.
In Leviathan, the camera was attached to robes, nets,
and even fish boxes that keeps swinging.
The film was disturbing to me, but it appealed to others.
At the end, it succeeded as a sensory film,
some people even left the hall because they felt sea sick.
Moreover, there is another interesting kind that was coined by the visual anthropologist Sarah Pibk
By the way, she studied in Kent University [Where I study]!
This kind is "Walking with video"
Which is documenting your subjects as they take the ways they regularly walk through.
Pink here tries to appreciate the effect of the people's landscapes on them,
and the honest memories and expressions they will kindle in these people.
So if you are documenting people who have natural ways they regularly take, or are in constant journey
take these walks with them and record it
not in a very aesthetic way per se, just join and record them in these walks
This may allow you to grasp genuine moments, other wise hard to be seen or recorded.
Last thing I want to tell you quickly about is
Documentary in a form of a website.
An interactive documentary website that engages its users with visuals, audios, and texts on the site.
It is a very interesting, new and engaging approach to documentary. That I am even excited to work on very soon.
Concluding, I want to say that Documentary visuals are very important,
They make anthropology way more accessible to a wider range, compared to academic articles and research.
There is so much that can't be fathomed well in texts, but could only be well represented through visuals.
This is why, many researchers use the "camera" as a tool for research.
And you, as a documentarist, you shouldn't chose a type all the way per se
It is not like you should do it 100% Sensory or 100% Participatory or so,
Instead, you can merge them, which is ideal!
There is no right or wrong, what is important is to represent your subjects fairly and satisfactorily.
And it should evoke good reflexivity fo you, your subjects and people who will watch your work.
Check all the sources and films I listed below.
And do not miss the next Episode!
And go check the previous episode on Liminality, if you did not yet!!
Share and Subscribe!
