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)