This manifesto was written in a Documentary Studies course lead by Prof. Blake Fitzpatrick as a part of my MFA in Documentary Media at Ryerson University, Toronto, Canada.

Documentary Manifesto

1

Documentary aids in the understanding of society

It is not important to define what constitutes a documentary in terms of form, what is of importance is to recognize what documentary serves as. Stella Bruzzi states, “The act of filming concretizes rather than distorts and is in itself a way of comprehending the world”. 1 This draws attention to the construction of meaning rather than to the meaning itself. Documentary, regardless of content or form, helps us understand others and ourselves in a way that fixes those notions in the time and place of the image(s). It is of utmost importance to constantly remember that we are engaged in creating an understanding of the world around us. That world exists prior to the presence of the camera, but it exists in a completely different manner.

2

There is no truth, only representations of truth

Documentary often gets the reputation of being a window in on the truth or reality of a given subject. Although, in order to understand documentary as a practice, we must recognize there is no one ‘truth’ or ‘reality’ to be taken from. As Nichols states, “to present a realistic likeness of something is to efface the agency of representation so that the likeness comes to the fore”. 2 Along the same lines, Linda Williams states, “Films cannot reveal the truth of events, but only the ideologies and consciousness that construct compelling truths”. 3 To summarize, documentary becomes a series of representations exposing the ideologies inherent in the society, group, maker, or world that these images are produced within. It is the likeness not the thing itself.

3

Always understand the weight of the work

We can never know how our work will be read indefinitely once it’s been put out in the world, but it is always important to take into account the effects of our documentation. In her article “The Problem of Speaking for Others” Linda Alcoff explains, “in order to evaluate attempts to speak for others in particular instances, we need to analyze the probable or actual effects of the words on the discursive material context.” 4 We as documentarians should not make works that have potential for harm or that further instill dangerous stereotypes that have historically grounded certain groups or individuals in belief systems harmful to them. While it is important not to allow the burden of representation to restrict us from creating works all together, it is of most importance to be very diligent about the work we do choose to make and how we choose to make it.

4

It is not about the individual

Although the making of a documentary may not require as many hands as a large budget fiction film, it is important to take note how many minds and bodies go into the making of the work. The documentary process is a group process and should be treated as such. The idea may have sparked in one individual but it is intensely inspired by the existence and lives of others. We should never get so wrapped up in our own vision and experience that we forget the absolutely crucial role that every other person or being plays in the making of the work. Along the same lines, whether someone is in front of the camera or behind it, their time (and sometimes identity) is being utilized in the making of this work; it is therefore crucial that all parties get reimbursed when possible.

5

Reclaiming the gaze. Experimenting with form.

Always make work through a feminist lens that works against systems of oppression and the power relationships instilled by the gaze. Throughout history documentary has been the vehicle of otherness, utilizing the camera as a means of understanding ‘the other’, (historically this was the white man documenting the primitive native). Although these practices are not in place as explicitly as they once were, there still remains a definite feel of ‘otherness’ in many documentary practices that stems directly from the genre’s past. It is important to be critical of these practices and move as far beyond them as possible, experimenting with form, characterization, content, etc. all as a means of reclaiming the gaze for the self, communities, or individuals being represented.

6

Performance/Performativity

“The performative documentary uses performance within a non-fiction context to draw attention to the impossibilities of authentic documentary representation”. 5 If we are to take documentary as the construction and representation of a certain aspect of society or the world, and if it is also crucial to keep in mind how the work is constructed, than the performative documentary mode is clearly a useful means of producing work. The performative documentary brings the modes of construction to the forefront in hopes of exposing or adding to the means of understanding the work or what it represents. Like performance, the performative documentary implies a performed representation of something, never immediately tying it’s players to what it represents. As documentarians we must constantly exploit the performance of our role so that our audience may have access to a layer that seeks to bridge the gap between audience member and subject/maker but also to bring the construction of the work to the forefront.

7

Understanding Power

It is crucial to understand the power we hold as documentarians. It is equally crucial not to deny or neglect this immense power, but to be aware of how it may affect any given situation. Linda Alcoff says, “Rituals of speaking are politically constituted by power relations of domination, exploitation and subordination”. 6 By this she is referring to the history of documentary practices, but also that the control lies in the hands of the maker and not in those who are being represented. It is therefore crucial to understand this power relationship so as to not abuse it in any way.

8

Location, Location, Location

Alcoff also mentions that “who is speaking to whom turns out to be as important for meaning and truth as what is said, in fact what is said turns out to change according to who is speaking and who is listening”. 7 Furthering this point, the place the director or maker is speaking from, in regards to their position in society, whether it be race, class, cultural background, level of education, etc. all effects the way they have chosen to represent their subjects. One part of recognizing power is to make the place you are speaking from as obvious or implicit in the work as possible. There is a leniency in how this is executed, but the onus is on the makers to place themselves in a social location so that the audience may try to comprehend the work with certain biases or cultural codes in mind.

9

Aesthetics are everything. Documentary as art practice

Documentary has had a reputation of being dry, linear and void of experimentation. It even still holds to the notion that the visuals aren’t as important as the content. While this may be true to an extent, it also relies on the assumption that the content is likely to be quite spectacular, in an empty and meaningless way. In terms of documentaries aesthetics, it is important not to allow the content to take over and to always make work that utilizes the aesthetic form that best represents the content. This is not to say that the work must be typical in its aesthetics, or carry any given quality that would deem it “beautiful” to a mainstream audience, this merely implies that the work should be true to its content in providing it with a style that best suits it.

10

Remembering is an Ethical Act

Susan Sontag in Regarding the Pain of Others says, “Perhaps too much value is assigned to memory, not enough to thinking. Remembering is an ethical act, has ethical value in and of itself”. 8 History does not have an omniscient presence, and seeing as documentary is tool in understanding the world, it doesn’t either. Therefore, Sontag’s point is entirely a critical end point. When we make works we constantly need to keep in mind that what we produce may aid in someone’s or an entire group’s memories and therefore these images take on somewhat of a sacred quality. Remembering should always be an ethical act and if documentary is a mode of remembering, than documentary must be an ethical act as well.

1 Bruzzi, Stella. New Documentary: Second Edition, 15.
2 Nichols, Bill. “Getting to Know You…: Knowledge, Power and the Body”, 175.
3 Williams, Linda. “Mirrors Without Memories: Truth, History and the New Documentary”, 16.
4 Alcoff, Linda. “The Problem of Speaking for Others”, 26.
5 Bruzzi, Stella. New Documentary: Second Edition,185.
6 Alcoff, Linda. “The Problem of Speaking for Others”, 15.
7 Ibid., 12
8 Sontag, Susan. Regarding the Pain of Others, 115

Works Cited

Alcoff, Linda (1991-92). “The Problem of Speaking for Others”. Cultural Critique,
Winter. NC: Oxford University Press, 5-32.

Bruzzi, Stella. New Documentary: Second Edition. New York and London: Routledge,
2006.

Nichols, Bill (1993). “Getting to Know You…: Knowledge, Power and the Body.” In
Renov, M. (Ed.), Theorizing Documentary. New York and London: Routledge, 174-226.

Sontag, Susan. Regarding the Pain of Others. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux,
2003.

Williams, Linda (1993). “Mirrors Without Memories: Truth, History and the New
Documentary” in Bruzzi, S., New Documentary: Second Edition. New York and London: Routledge, 2006.