Introduction



Documentary: A definition (Oxford Dictionary, 2011)


Pronunciation:

/dɒkjʊˈmɛnt(ə)ri/adjective
  • 1consisting of or based on official documents:documentary evidence of regular payments from the company
  • 2using pictures or interviews with people involved in real events to provide a factual report on a particular subject:a documentary programme about Manchester United

noun (plural documentaries)

  • a film or television or radio programme that provides a factual report on a particular subject.


Introduction




Over the course of this blog,  I intend to examine the effects of the interactive documentary on conventional narratives and the assertion that as a new media form they issue a  "fundamental challenge to the principle of narrative coherence, which is at the core of traditional documentary" (Whitelaw, 2002). 




Bertolt Brecht
Brecht (1930, cited in Buszek) argues that as “reality changes; in order to represent it, modes of representation must change”. Although seemingly ahead of his time in prophesising the multimedia world we now engage in every-day; it could be argued that Brecht was merely alluding to a logical progression of an art-form due to its dependence upon the evolving technologies of the time. However, it is clear that the mode of the documentary has greatly benefited from the onset of new technology. The early 1960’s saw the first use of 16mm film cameras in documentary; intending to allow the audience to perceive “reality to be seen” (Morin, 1980). This style has continued to dominate the documentary format with such practitioners as Nick Broomfield still exhibiting the look and feel of cinema verite documentary. 

However, perhaps one of the largest and most important innovations in this field has been the introduction of the ‘citizen camera’, or ‘citizen journalist’. The advent of cheap, inexpensive mobile phones capable of image and video capture and integrated together with the simplicity and streamlined effectiveness of internet uploading to such social networks as facebook and twitter have enabled the everyday citizen to become a documenter. Images and videos that find themselves embedded via twitter, facebook and other social networks, can see hundreds of viewers comment upon them and share to other users. "Mainstream media are seeking warblogs out; clearly they see the potential (or practically free) content from citizen reporters, not to mention potentially new readers”  Melissa Wall said in a recent collection of citizen journalism perspectives (Allen & Thorsen 2009, p.36) which suggests that media outlets are using blogs to extend their own content; much like citizen journalists. Thus the media consumers have in some part become producers too; finding content and information quite freely available over the internet. 


One of the biggest risks to the narrative of the conventional documentary medium is the increasing emergence of the new media documentary, or 'interactive documentary'. Using internet webpages as spaces in which to place content and multimedia; documentary makers are not restricted to the governance of a linear medium like film which is not able to be edited by a viewer once broadcast. By looking into the two media forms on my blog; I intend to explore the narrative forms behind both and ascertain the threat that new media may pose on the conventional narrative. 



Web 2.0 & the introduction of the interactive documentary

A recent study by Väätäjä et al. (2009, cited Musser et al. 2006) defined web 2.0 as "a set of economic, social, and technology trends that collectively form the basis for the next generation of the Internet – a more mature, distinctive medium characterized by user participation, openness, and network effects". This study; written in 2009; citing Tim O'reilly's work which brainstormed ideas in determining the concept of web 2.0, suggests that the concept is still prominent in media circles which seek define the increased user interactivity experiences across the internet since its mainstream inception in the 1980's. Web 2.0, together with increased internet bandwidth availability has allowed users to interact with content provided to them by the makers of both conventional televised documentary programmes and non-conventional, purely internet-based documentaries alike.


The BBC recently outlined some of its production aims over a documentary about the world wide web; appealing to viewers to contribute to its creation: "It is our ambition to open up the production process as much as possible; to share as much of our thinking as possible, as the production team strive to create a cohesive, accurate and relevant documentary about the World Wide Web. We'll be blogging as we go; we'll share our theories; we'll be putting up rushes from the filming; we'll be asking for advice and stories from you as we go along" (Biddle, 2009). This further provides evidence to show that the narrative nature and style of the conventional documentary is being challenged, in favour of a narrative provided by a group of dedicated viewers. Essentially, the interactive documentary brings together the broad and multinational audience of the internet; providing images, visuals, sounds and a plethora of written texts in order to allow the potential for participant-led direct involvement in the way in which the documentary narrative is uncovered, as opposed to the conventionally creator-led narratives of documentary programming.

Interactive Documentary Narrative

Roland Barthes
Whitelaw (2002) argues that "new media forms pose a fundamental challenge to the principle of narrative coherence" which insinuates that interactive documentaries do indeed compete with the traditional style of imparted narrative. The shared 'experiencing' of the interactive documentary narrative and its requirement for user participation demonstrates a change in the conventional authorship of narrative. Although writing on the death of the literary author, Barthes (1978) challenged the conventional voice-of-god authority of the author stating that "the modern scriptor is born simultaneously with the text, is in no way equipped with a being preceding or exceeding the writing, is not the subject with the book as predicate; there is no other time than that of the enunciation and every text is eternally written here and now." 


Interactive documentary evokes a sense of progression with regard to this notion; as it asks the viewer of the text to become involved; "creating a visual and spatial record, is relatively open, [the] narrative is never overbearing" (Whitelaw, 2002). This draws attention to the question of whether or not a viewer should need a narrator in such instances.


 However, without a definite voice propelling an audience towards a certain key plot premise or point, the interactive documentary must exist outside of many of the constraints of conventional televisual viewing. The captivating effect of having interactive buttons and side-stories together with no clear indication of the longevity and breadth of the storyline would appear to coincide with Barthes' belief that the "birth of the reader must be at the cost of the death of the Author", the author being present to "impose a limit on that text" (Barthes, 1978). There is no dispute that there is an author existing behind a new-media text; rather a contradiction of the definition of "author" is found, it being farther removed from its original role as the controller of the narrative to more of a mediating role, creating the content, but not steering its order of consumption.

Linearity & non-linearity in conventional documentary

Essentially, conventional documentary form exists upon a premise of its contents not being re-arranged or edited. Moreover, content is edited for the viewer; being a sequence of juxtaposed visual elements and cues that are designed to enable an audience to "presume that [they] are absorbing a presentation of fact" (Rollyson, 2004, p1). The linearity of this concept is clear, despite provoking a mixture of thoughts and emotions which can leave facts and statements open to a large amount of predisposed interpretation depend upon a viewers' native cultural understandings, the traditional documentary is steeped in its formulaic function to provide a linear narrative. Of course, with the advent of the DVD, it can be seen that there are in-fact some interactive and reactive features offered alongside the documentary; commentaries, picture galleries and extra features that can coincide with original content to offer a viewer a different analysis of what they are seeing as well as one to back up and further strengthen the initial argument of the documentary itself.




Man with a camera (Vertov, 1929) provides us with an insight into documentary which, although avant-garde in style, offers views of a utopian society in which the people work towards the good of a nation. The film envisages Vertov's dominant beliefs in marxist theory, coupled with the desires of his producers to highlight the effectiveness of soviet achievement through film. Hence although appearing non-linear in its' narrative structure and edited form, the film can still arguably be interpreted as ultimately linear; there are no options for the audience to directly intervene and edit the order, frame or construction of the film, as it exists in a progressive, set form. However, Vertov was limited by the technology of the era. Having not been experimented with fully in the 1920's, Vertov's use of film was ground-breaking; using technological advances in editing; most of which he pioneered to engage an audience in interpreting images by themselves. Without a voice-over, Vertov's film asked an audience to re-imagine the conventional narrative of cinema (which utilised text plates in order to narrate). Albeit restricted to using the imagination of the audience as a basis for narrative interactivity, Man with camera would appear to have much in common with its' modern counterpart, the interactive documentary.




In direct contrast almost seventy years later, Nick Broomfield emerged as a skilful manipulator of the documentary form. Whilst demonstrating juxtapositions between sound and visuals, and contrasting visuals against his uniform and unaffected narration, his use of a rigid narrative can be seen in Biggie and Tupac,  (Broomfield, 2002) seen above. His direct participation in all of his documentaries (as the sound and boom operator) is used to great effect to create the sense of an 'on the fly' narrative, where it is to be assumed that he arrives in a location and tries to actively investigate as much as possible 'on camera'. Broomfield's appeal largely exists upon the premise that Nick Broomfield the crew-member on screen exists in a different paradigm than that on Nick Broomfield the documentary maker. In a similar way to how interactive documentaries utilise a narrative largely comprised of information chosen and comprehended by the user; Broomfield's documentaries ask viewers to decipher parts of the story themselves. Broomfield's unwitting on-screen persona often clashes with a more pre-meditated and post-reactive voiceover narration, which require viewers to pull together aspects of Broomfield's rough cinema verite style; which have been described as "exercises in complete chaos" (Bruzzi, 2004, p208). 



This brings into question whether Broomfield is indeed the master of his own documentary narratives; fuelling participants on with his own flamboyancy, posing the question of whether his films are a result of "dialectical negotiation between the reality that existed before he arrived and that which subsequently becomes the subject of his films" (Bruzzi, 2004, p208). Above, Broomfield mentions his origins as a stills photographer; using images which let the viewer decide the argument, rather than motion picture, with which he has had to learn to construct narrative himself (Broomfield, 2009).

The issue of linearity in the interactive documentary

Whilst looking at examples of interactive documentary; it is important to note the success of The National Film Board of Canada's critically acclaimed documentary, Out my window (Cizek, 2010). The documentary studies the lives of families living in high rise apartments in 13 cities across the world. The website offers the user with a number of different scenarios that they can access; removing the conventional linearity of a guided storyline in favour of the user clicking on 'rooms' within the frame. Options to turn on or off the accompanying ambient sound also allow the user to be presented with a differently emotive story.

However, perhaps more contributive to the interactive fashion of the documentary is Out my window's (2010) designation 'sub-documentary'. Set within the paradigm of 'High Rises'; the documentary is just one of a collection of different pieces on the nature of high rise apartment culture and the stories found there. This collect is growing to accommodate new stories and features. However, it is apparent that the way in which these pieces are contained or encapsulated within a given genre gives significance to the argument that there is cohesion and a structured form behind an interactive 'fascia': non-interactive elements held behind the premise of interactivity. Barthes (1978) argues that: "In the multiplicity of writing, everything is to be disentangled, nothing deciphered; the structure can be followed, ‘run’ (like the thread of a stocking) at every point and at every level, but there is nothing beneath: the space of writing is to be ranged over, not pierced."

Whilst referring to literature; the inferred understanding of written narrative being 'disentangled' yet not 'deciphered' can be applied to that of Out my window (2010). Despite having a seemingly non-linear user interface; the website still requires users to willingly participate in the illusion that an author does not exist behind the piece. The documentary asks that viewers accept an attempt at multi-linearity; rather than embrace a concept that has no guiding voice, or authorship. As (Whitelaw, 2002) critically asserts,the interactive documentary could be seen as "little more than a functional platform for delivering bite-size chunks of quite traditional documentary." This statement lends strength to the concept that an 'outer-skin' exists. Behind this, the interactive documentary finds itself still tethered to the original intentions of the author, who designs a seemingly unlimited audio-visual platform for users, whilst using conventional documentary methods to deploy his own ideas, agendas and initiatives.

If a documentary wishes to become fully non-linear; it will need to be uncategorised, genre-less and constantly evolving in terms of both content and its' subject matter. Moreover; the documentary will have to exist as author-less, as the very function of an author is to impart guidance over narrative. Without the author, creator, or designer, the product truly becomes "a tissue of quotations drawn from the innumerable centres of culture" (Barthes, 1978). However; this move drastically reduces the effectiveness of cohesive narrative; as without a structure to how content is uploaded to a website, it can become hard to sift through, maintain and ensure consistent quality. Whitelaw (2002) also begs the question that:"if we explode and open the structure, how can we be sure that the story is being conveyed? Other stories, or non-stories, may become possible.

Many recent interactive documentaries react by ensuring that the content is always overdetermined, that each clip, each chunk of content points back to the unifying narrative. We may surf at will through its facets or aspects, but the “theme” is never more than a click away; the possibilities of other themes, other interpretations, other realities,are closed down."This also brings into repute the conventional way in which an audience expects content to be offered to them. Having been conditioned to accept minimal participation in the building and deconstruction of narrative; the archetypal cinema-goer can reject the added effort and use of individual initiative required in order to 'create' their own narrative. A study by I-Docs, (2011, cited Gaudenzi, 2009) argues that: "the viewer participant engages differently in an interactive documentary than in a linear one. Her agency goes far beyond the act of interpretation or empathy, typical in linear films, and stretches as far as new modes of interaction can go. What is relevant in digital interactive forms is the degree of agency that the multiple participants have on the final product and how those actions will position them. The degree of agency depends on the different modes of interaction that are possible in digital media.”



Furthermore, it can be found that a viewer has to participate much more physically with an interactive documentary; making it an active, rather than passive experience. The 'Hypodermic syringe theory'; although deemed by academics as "endemic" and "misplaced" (Klaehn, 2010, p331), does have credibility in it's basic concepts of audience reception theory. Packard (1957) set out to outline advertising strategy; establishing the concept that audiences were unavoidably receptive of television advertising. The theory does carry over to the argument that audiences of conventional television have been conditioned towards passive viewing. Even if this theory is outdated, and perhaps super-seeded by a current 'on-demand' culture; it would still explain why interactive documentary makers are not fully adopting non-linear designs within their documentaries.



Conclusion

In Out my window (2010) above; it can be seen that the interactive documentary clearly intends to break stereotypical linear narratives in documentary, by using technology as a means to become a "compelling new media experience" (Whitelaw, 2002). This brings into question whether this non-linear narrative is a result of film-makers intending to re-imagine an art-form; or simply taking advantage of the intrinsic principles of the internet as an interactive environment in which a user's understanding of the medium have shaped the way in which it is consumed.


However, as we embrace digital television as a mainstream broadcast service in the UK; it can be suggested that both the realms of the internet and television are converging, thus forming the possibility of more on-demand, interactive 'smart TV' features that could incorporate a lot of the features required for interactive documentary, ie. click-able links and navigation controls. As it would appear, the current interactive documentary does exhibit many features of the conventional broadcast documentary. Accreditation of participants and producers, sound cues, and voice over narration are all concepts established in documentary film which are also present here. The flexibility and modification of these functions, allowing 'choice' is indeed more of a decisive move towards interactive documentary consciously asking users to interact with their experience and make it unique.


Despite the BBC experimenting with what it calls 'open source documentary', "striving to open up the creative process... asking advice and stories from you as we go along" (Biddle, 2009), its reliance upon a production team to create what it classifies as "cohesive, accurate and relevant documentary" indicates that an audience is to be guided through a tailored and edited end-product. Further to this, Barthes (1978) states that: "narrative is never assumed by a person but a mediator, shaman, or relator (sic) whose 'performance' - the mastery of the narrative code - may possibly be admired but never his genius". In assuming that a narrative requires an author; this effectively asserts that the author or 'mediator' is the ultimate controller and manipulator of the text. Contention over the designation of the author exists in the fact that even if content is provided by multiple users; there still has to be an individual who will ultimately set the parameters of the project thus shaping its content. Whitelaw (2002) asserts: "recent interactive documentaries react by ensuring that the content is always over-determined, that each clip, each chunk of content points back to the unifying narrative".


In conclusion, it would appear more obvious that there are over-arching themes that are unavoidable in order to determine and underpin a successful narrative, however fragmented it may appear on the surface. Of course, it is equally as important to realise that the conditioning of viewers to a non-interactive documentary asks new or unfamiliar interactive users to 'migrate' over to something not typical or native to them. As an emerging documentary form, it cannot be fair to assume that the future of the interactive documentary is confined to the parameters or limits if its formulae; as its popularity grows, we may begin to see the genre move towards more effective non-linear narrative. The conventional documentary film has the longevity of it's own success as an established and effective media form which confirms that at present a balanced comparison of the successes of both forms cannot be drawn due to the significantly shorter history of its interactive counterpart.

Bibliography

Allen, S. and Thorsen, E., 2009. Citizen Journalism: Global perspectives. New York, Bern, Berlin, Bruxelles, Frankfurt am Main, Oxford, Wien: Peter Lang
Barthes, R. and Heath, S.,1978. Image, Music, Text. New York: Hill and Wang


Biddle, D., Friday, 10 July 2009. What is Digital Revolution (working title) all about? BBC Digital Revolution. Available from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/digitalrevolution/2009/07/what-is-digital-revolution-wor.shtml [Accessed 17 December 2011] 

Bruzzi, S., 2004. New Documentary. 2nd Ed. London: Taylor & Francis

Buszek, M. Bertolt Brecht, “Popularity and Realism” (1938) Available from: http://www.mariabuszek.com/kcai/Expressionism/Readings/BrechtPopReal.pdf

Cizek, K., 2010. Out My Window. National Film Board of Canada. Available from http://interactive.nfb.ca/#/outmywindow [Accessed 18 December 2011]

Heli Väätäjä and Marika Lehtonen, 2009. From portals to web 2.0 marketplaces. Finland: Tampere University of Technology, Finland. Available from: http://www.ebrc.fi/kuvat/1068.pdf [Accessed 19 December 2011]

Klaehn, J., The political economy of media and power, 2010. New York, Bern, Berlin, Bruxelles, Frankfurt am Main, Oxford, Wien: Peter Lang.

I-Docs.org, 2011. Differences between linear and interactive documentaries. Featuring the interactive documentary. Bristol: Nina Simoes. http://i-docs.org/2011/12/12/differences-between-linear-and-interactive-documentaries-featuring-the-interactive-documentary-i/ [Accessed 10 December 2011]

Morin, E.,1980. Festival Cinéma du Réel Statement. Translated by Michel Brault and John Sifton. Paris, May, 1980.

Oxford Dictionary, 2011. Oxford English Dictionary 2011. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Packard, V., 1957. The Hidden Persuaders. London: Penguin

Rollyson, C., 2004. Documentary film: a primer. Bloomington: iUniverse, Inc 

Vertov, D., Youtube, 2011. Man with movie camera (1929). [provided above]

Whitelaw, M., 2002. Playing games with reality: Only fish shall visit and interactive documentary. In: Essay for Halfeti: Only fish shall visitby Brogan Hunt, Exhibited at: Artspace, 19 September - 12 October 2002. Sydney, Australia. Available from http://creative.canberra.edu.au/mitchell/papers/PlayingGames.pdf
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)