Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Rane Willerslev
(Ethnographic Collections, Moesgaard Museum)
Christian Suhr (Aarhus University)
Send message to Convenors
- Discussant:
-
Peter Ian Crawford
(UiT - The Arctic University of Norway)
- Format:
- Workshops
- Location:
- DID
- Sessions:
- Wednesday 27 August, -, -, -, Thursday 28 August, -
Time zone: Europe/Ljubljana
Short Abstract:
In an attempt to go beyond conventional forms of realism in ethnographic filmmaking this workshop invites people to reconsider the possibilities and limitations of using montage and other forms of filmic manipulation to communicate experiences of diversity and mutuality on film.
Long Abstract:
In ethnographic films montage has traditionally been conceived as something best to be avoided or minimized in order to bring forth the most accurate depictions of sociocultural reality (Vaughan 1992). Thus, the long uninterrupted shot, which preserves natural duration and reproduces space somewhat similar to ordinary perceptual experience, has become the hallmark of ethnographic films (Taylor 1996). Contrary to anthropological writings, which often work by illuminating cultural difference, the uninterrupted shots of ethnographic films have been valued for their potential to transcend cultural boundaries by underscoring the commonalities of being human (MacDougall 1999). Nevertheless, reception studies have found that the extent to which viewers perceive such transcultural properties in images significantly relies on the context in which the images appear (Martinez 2004). Thus, the particular juxtaposition of shots in a film may guide or misguide viewers to pay attention to cultural differences or to transcultural commonalities of being human. If it is accepted that montage is an unavoidable part of any cinematic representation a world of possibilities opens up. Thus, montage may be used to construct new visions, impossible to obtain from the subjective viewpoint of our bodies (Vertov 1984). Montage may be used to depict the multispatial and simultaneous character of global cultural processes (Kiener 2006, Marcus 1994). Finally, montage may be used as a powerful means of deconstruction (Minh-ha 1982). It appears that montage is a pertinent issue to explore. In this workshop we invite people to reconsider the possibilities and limitations of using montage and other forms of filmic manipulation (framing, grading, soundediting etc.) to communicate experiences of diversity and mutuality on film.
Accepted papers:
Session 1 Wednesday 27 August, 2008, -Paper short abstract:
This paper addresses the paradoxical difficulties of ethnographically conveying the visual qualities of memory through the medium of film. It investigates the use of live-action animation, sound montage, and extra-long takes as possible methods for filmically treating the vivid yet invisible phenomena of memory and the imagination.
Paper long abstract:
In my doctoral research on sites and practices of remembrance work in post-socialist Bucharest, I encountered a paradox while attempting to explore this subject through the medium of film. While memory, like film, is widely accepted as a visual phenomenon, deeply connected to sensory and material processes, it is only that way in the imagination. Although a memory may retain the quality of a photographic image in your mind, you cannot document that mental impression, or show it to someone else. Actually conveying memory through film requires more than literally lifting images from the mind and transposing them to the photographic realm.
To address this paradox in my current work, I have experimented with styles of filming and editing that aim to convey the feelings and textures of memories, rather than theoretical or academic descriptions of them. My goal is not to merely illustrate memory through film, but rather to capture its visual, tactile, and sensory properties. This paper discusses some of my experiments with live-action animation, extensive sound montage, and extra-long takes in order to ethnographically approach the subject of memory, and examines their implications for expanding upon more conventional assumptions and practices in visual anthropology.
Paper short abstract:
Convinced that only the awareness and mastery of the possibilities of cinematic medium can give access to human experience being filmed and convey more than a mere indexical knowledge, I use the lessons of filmmakers as different as Jean Rouch and Maya Deren in my field-work on ritual possession dances in West Africa.
Paper long abstract:
Nourished by cinematic propositions of filmmakers as Jean Rouch or Maya Deren, my reflection on moving images concretises in a field-work research lead by the requirements of film-making. I am working on ritual possession dances in West Africa and I privilege a visual approach that doesn't contempt itself with the visual aspect of these rituals high in colours and body postures. My attention interrogates the lived experiences behind this often shocking visibility. A peculiar kind of being in the world that blurs the borderlines between corporeal and mental experiences is questioned. The camera, when not used as merely recording tool, allows to establish a relationship of shared experience on the ritual ground thus transfigured in cinematic space.
I consider the moving body and its ways to inhabit time and space. The dancer's body in the peculiar experience of a danced invitation for Gods to descend. Also filmmaker's camera incorporated body, having access by the very means of her/his camera, to the dancer's experience. But in order for that to happen, in order to translate, in a language addict only to visual phenomena, this corporeal experience opened to other kind of presence, trespassing the limits of visible, several exploratory paths must be followed: 1° the relation between self and shared corporeal experience (sharing will be understood not as contamination but as « being together » in the ritual space by the bias of the camera) ; 2° the inscription of lived experience in the filmic texture - images, sounds, rhythm, cuts, editing.
Paper short abstract:
How do postcolonial, diasporic filmmakers use their filmic representations and the possibilities of montage to reflect on the perception and projection of contemporary global cultures? The paper emphasises the notion of culture and the spatial dimension of anthropology.
Paper long abstract:
The focus of this paper will be on the notion of culture and the spatial dimension of anthropology which have been subject to critical debate.
Colonial ethnographic film was employed to create representations of the 'Other' as an expression of colonial dominance. Since the formal end of European colonial hegemony, anthropology sees itself confronted with a number of unresolved problems concerning not only conventional ethnographic methods, but also global systems of domination. Transnationalism and global migration challenge the construction of fixed cultural, racial and spatial differences and thus undermine simple binary oppositions.
How do postcolonial, diasporic filmmakers use their filmic representations and montage as one filmic form of manipulation to reflect on the perception and projection of contemporary global cultures? Giving up naïve ideas of inversion and going beyond the idea of simply turning the gaze or the camera - how can the concept of 'Reverse Anthropology' undercut the discourses about the powerful and the disempowered? Manthia Diawara's film Rouch in Reverse (1995) can be understood as an attempt to create 'coevalness' and spatial interconnection by using montage. With his 'Reverse Anthropology', Diawara wants to challenge the images "straight out of the textbooks of my francophone upbringing in Africa" and the pregiven cultural and territorial entities. This paper emphasises aspects of migration, transnationalism and hybridity, and their complex consequences for the construction of identity, power and processes of deterritorialization and reterritorialization in ethnographic film.
Paper short abstract:
On the basis of the Austrian anti-globalisation documentary "Darwin's Nightmare" (2004), the paper analyzes the syntagmatic structuring of a global-political filmic discourse, particularly the shaping of ideas and images of "the Other", by the means of montage.
Paper long abstract:
On the basis of the Austrian anti-globalisation documentary "Darwin's Nightmare" (2004), the paper analyzes the syntagmatic structuring of a political filmic discourse by the means of montage. In the centre of the discussion lies the question about the shaping of ideas and images of "the Other" by the omission and the juxtaposition of audio-visual information within the scope of politically committed documentary. Like the ethnographic film, documentary in general seems to contain the legitimation of representing the world "like it is" by its indexical signification as well as its assumed lack of staging and acting. But while ethnographic film tries to convey the culture of the people shown, sometimes the socially critical documentary rather tends to serve the worldview of the director than to represent the actual life-worlds of "the Other". That way, the analysis of the filmic rhetoric of "Darwin's Nightmare" - which criticizes the globally working fish-industry around Lake Victoria, Tanzania, and the local socio-biological disturbance that goes along with it - has to focus on three core issues: First, what kind of concepts about globalisation feed this film? Secondly, how does director Hubert Sauper asses notions of diversity and mutuality? Eminently, how does he give voice to the parties involved in that global setting? Thirdly, to what extent can this documentary be considered authentic to reality? Regarding the recent height of "global documentary", the intersecting analyses of filmic and global-political discourse at the level of montage seek contribution to the debate about the representation of "the Other".
Paper short abstract:
Through concepts of "assemblage" and "intervals", we will explore the multiple uses of editing in Perrault's 1980 documentary. It expresses the dynamics of the Quebecois research on native history, as well as the cultural and territorial dispossession of the Naskapi.
Paper long abstract:
As a filmmaker, making use of the spoken word and "shared anthropology", Perrault imposes a "harmonic" form of editing in his movies that creates a powerful dynamics. This encourages the existence of a "collective enunciation" ( Michele Garneau). He explores the polyphonic nature of popular voice and identity of the "Quebecois" through editing.
"The Land without trees… " follows the quest of three scholars on the trail of a vanished caribou hunt that brought together Naskapi on the shores of Lake Mouchouânipi. The soundtrack, which is an assembly of testimonies, interviews and comments from the scientists, creates a continuous underlying tension with the images : archive photos, archeological excavations; interactions and maps showing the limits of native's lands in Quebec.
The documentary raises the question of the fragmentary nature of scientific and cinematographic research, by nature based on limited information, about a past which cannot be recreated. An aesthetic analysis of sequences demonstrates the anthropological issues lying behind the editing. Zooms and reframing inside one shot, as well as editing across different shots express the interactions and "co-presence" between the scientists and the natives.
The « assemblage » of images and sound reveals the dynamics of Quebecois research, based on shaky documentary sources. Four century later, the native people's history is being taken into account.
The "intervals" created by the editing permits reflection about territorial and cultural dispossession. While Fragmented, the interviews are integrated into a wider historical framework. It gives the impression of an "absence-presence" of the contemporary indigenous voice.
Paper short abstract:
The proposed paper explores the ways in which contemporary African experimental ethnographic film is informed by the surrealist movement and contemporary African philosophy in order to understand how practices of montage challenge and reconstruct contemporary anthropological categories and understanding.
Paper long abstract:
The proposed paper explores the ways in which contemporary African experimental ethnographic film is informed by a political aesthetic first proposed in the surrealist manifestos of the 1920's and further developed ideologically by contemporary African philosophers. By focusing particularly on the process of montage as a site of aesthetic and anthropological importance, the paper focuses on the overlapping ideas of Antonin Artaud and Franz Fanon and the importance of this overlap in further developing a theoretical context to analyze and understand the ways in which avant-garde art, ethnographic film, and African philosophy exist in symbiotic relationships. Aesthetic practices of rupture, polyphony, and narrative and alternative representations of time, history, and memory remain ideological categories and cinematographic choices frequently employed but rarely interrogated in the context of their importance to the field of postcolonial African visual studies.
This paper articulates how this interrogation leads to an understanding of the concrete ways in which the practice of montage invites a deconstruction of what Decerteau identified as spatial practices in contemporary ethnography; by distinguishing linearity from truth, the analysis of the use of montage in contemporary experimental ethnographic film points to the ways in which these practices place in dialogue cultural processes in a visual manifestation of Bakhtin's notion of heteroglossia. Hartog's idea of the regime d'historicite is put into question with serious philosophical and methodological consequences for the field of anthropology and African studies enumerated in the conclusion of the paper.
Paper short abstract:
This paper considers recent attempts to transgress the understanding of ethnographic exhibitions as a matter of representing the Other. By consciously approaching the exhibition as a collage we may envoke mutual existential themes in the display of familiar and unfamiliar objects.
Paper long abstract:
The realisation that we are today engaged in a world of global interconnectedness of an unforeseen scale has caused ethnographic museums to reconsider their aim and practice. A number of ethnographic museums are now focussing on our mutual global interdependence rather than cultural diversity - displaying our global entanglement in questions of global trade, HIV/AIDS, climate change etc.
But parallel to this development, it is possible to trace an approach to exhibition making that aims at establishing another kind of mutuality in the jumbling together of the familiar and the unfamiliar. This approach embraces the kind of co-operation between anthropology and the surrealists of the 1920s and 30s described by Clifford (1986). If the montage may work as a new ideal in ethnographic filmmaking we may argue that the collage is the ideal of this kind of exhibition making - the juxtaposition of apparently opposed worlds on the same plane bringing forth mutual existential themes suppressed in our everyday practical concerns.
Such an approach challenges the use of the exhibition as media and demands an awareness of the inherently constructed character of the exhibition. In accordance to the subject matter, this paper will reflect on the use of collage in contemporary exhibition making by applying on a single plane a number of disconnected and diverse cases - concrete examples of uses of collage in ethnographic exhibitions, Alfred Gell's (1996) imaginary exhibition of traps and modern conceptual art, and an analysis of the multiple agencies involved in the creation of an exhibition.
Paper short abstract:
Montage appears to be inevitable; the filming is limited by conditions such as the time and the space, by the vision field of the camera. A set of 'rules'- happening in the laboratory - influences the 'final cut'. What are the levels of montage? What are its traps or advantages?
Paper long abstract:
The full objectivity seems to be impracticable during an ethnographic film making - as J. Vigo pointed out, the documentary is in every case a "documented point of view". The images are destined not only to the scientific community but also as a 'feedback' (J.Rouch) to the filmed individual or group. During the montage the author should chose the images which are entering in the 'final cut'. The final cut influences directly the understanding (and the 'misunderstanding') of his work by the public and his 'subjects'. The montage appears to be a way of communication which transmits a kind of 'message' - so what is to be kept and what is to be left out? What is to be transmitted to the viewer? The 'story-creation' is one of the 'dangers' of this procedure. Then again, some elements which could be important for the understanding of this 'message' could be left out…
Which are the images that the author can cut out and how to do it?
I would like to analyze examples taken from my fieldwork experience: through the examples I will explain the choice of my filmed subjects, and how I have selected the 'right' sequences for the final cut. What guided my choices? Which were the critics of my fellow colleagues? I will also mention some of the feedbacks, the reactions obtained from the filmed individuals or communities after showing them the final cut.