View
117
Download
3
Category
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
An essay discussing the performative documentary mode, taken from the second year of my film degree.
Citation preview
Alex Turner ©2010
Discuss Bruzzi’s notion of the ‘performative documentary’, with detailed
reference to two documentaries.
The aim of this essay is to address the notion of the performative documentary mode
as ‘a mode which emphasizes – and indeed constructs a film around – the often
hidden aspect of performance, whether on the part of the documentary subjects or the
filmmakers’ (Bruzzi, 2000: 153). Using Bruzzi’s article on the performative
documentary, it will firstly give a brief explanation of the mode itself, how it is
constructed and why – according to Bruzzi – it is an important part of the
documentary canon. The essay will explore in detail the films Aileen: Life and Death
of a Serial Killer (Nick Broomfield, 2003) and Capturing the Friedmans (Andrew
Jarecki, 2003) in order to demonstrate the various ways in which the performative
documentary is constructed. Using Bruzzi’s article as a framework, the analysis of
these two documentary films will attempt to provide an understanding of the mode,
leading to the conclusion that, as Bruzzi notes, the performative documentary holds an
important place in the history of documentary film because it acknowledges the
intermediary function of the camera and crew as well as the subjective, inescapably
biased nature of the medium (Bruzzi, 2000: 180).
In psychology, the term ‘reactivity’ refers to the common phenomenon that arises
when an individual (or subject) adjusts their behaviour as a result of the knowledge
that they are being observed. The importance and effect of reactivity is often taken
into account during the analysis of any psychological study where it may be present.
In short, it is acknowledged that by observing something, one undoubtedly changes it.
In terms of the still image, Pierre Bourdieu noted a host of effects the camera has
1
Alex Turner ©2010
upon its subjects as they play out their archetypal roles (Bourdieu, 2007: 73-98). It
seems conceivable that simply the presence of a camera documenting an event will
alter the event itself. One of the adjustments in behaviour in the presence of a still
camera that could be said to appear is the pose. In the presence of a constantly
observing, constantly recording camera, a continuous version of the pose could be
referred to as the performance.
Earlier forms of documentary film, such as cinéma vérité or direct cinema, held the
concept of a single, objective truth as an ideal to be reached. In order to achieve this,
these forms of cinema would attempt to collapse the boundary between subject and
representation (Bruzzi, 2000: 68). In contrast, the performative documentary is
partially defined by a direct reaction or opposition to these earlier aims of
documentary. By the use of narrative and filmic techniques, performance of the
filmmaker (as in the films of Nick Broomfield) or subjects and talking head
interviews (as in Capturing the Friedmans) it highlights the constructed nature of the
documentary by revealing the presence of the camera and its intrusion, marking a
distinction between the unadulterated reality of the event or subject matter and the
‘reality’ of the documentary itself.
The performative documentary can be roughly broken down into two categories.
Firstly, there is the documentary that focuses on the intrusive nature of the filmmaker
and the process of making the documentary itself. Secondly, there is the documentary
that focuses on the performance of the subjects it chooses to represent. Although there
is often a certain amount of overlap between these two approaches (Bruzzi, 2000:
2
Alex Turner ©2010
154) – no less in the two focus films of this essay - it is Broomfield’s Aileen: Life and
Death of a Serial Killer that perhaps best demonstrates the first category.
Firstly, it is important to note that Broomfield’s Life and Death was marketed
alongside the fiction film Monster (Patty Jenkins, 2003), a biography of Aileen
Wuornos. There is a point to be made here regarding the relationship between reality
and fiction; the cross-marketing of these films seems to have influenced the way
audiences see Aileen Wuornos. Critics often considered the films as closely related or
reviewed them alongside each other (Doherty, 2004); Monster was the fictionalised,
dramatised companion to the truth of Life and Death, a reality that many deemed to be
far more engaging than fiction (Horeck, 2007: 142). The close relationship between
the marketing of drama and documentary seems to reflect the performance of Aileen
herself, who is often clearly shown to be ‘acting up’ for the cameras, as well as the
star director Broomfield, whose films are often noted for their acknowledgement of
subjectivity.
Aileen: Life and Death of a Serial Killer follows the story of Nick Broomfield as he
returns to speak with Aileen shortly before her execution. As his first film about
Aileen (Broomfield, 1992) argued that she had been exploited by almost everyone
around her, Broomfield returns over a decade later to argue that the death penalty,
when applied to the criminally insane, is an injustice.
Broomfield’s films focus on the documentary form itself and how it is constructed.
They are often ‘built around the torturous chase after elusive subjects and the
collapsed interview that sometimes fails to materialise’ (Bruzzi, 2000: 171). As a
3
Alex Turner ©2010
result of this, Broomfield himself often takes centre stage. The opening of Life and
Death reflects this, as we are shown a point of view shot of from behind the
windscreen of a car; Broomfield’s – and our – new journey has begun. The film’s
narrative is structured accordingly; there are no observational sequences in which we
are invited to simply watch the events unfolding onscreen and the story begins and
ends when Broomfield himself deems it complete. Every scene that takes place is
mediated by either a deadpan voiceover explaining the situation or by Broomfield
himself stepping in front of the camera, physically leading us from one point to
another.
In a sense, the success of Broomfield’s films and his onscreen presence signifies a
conscious awareness of the filmmaking process and an end to the idealised truth
documentaries try to capture (Bruzzi, 2000: 164) If one of the chief aims of the
performative mode is to create awareness of the documentary process, Broomfield
provides ample examples of this in Life and Death. One of the most notable instances
of this is the scene in which he is called to testify in court regarding the authenticity of
his previous documentary on Aileen some 11 years before. Here, several levels of
reality seem to come to a confusing fore. Firstly, there are the three levels of reality
which can be found in all forms of documentary: the putative (the unmediated reality
which seems to exist only as an awareness and only in the sense that it is required to
in order for other levels to follow), the profilmic (the mediated reality created by the
presence of Broomfield and his crew) and the screened. In addition to this, the reality
of his previous documentary exists, with its own putative and profilmic levels, all of
which are being addressed during the filming of another documentary. When
questioned as to the authenticity of this reality (specifically regarding a car journey in
4
Alex Turner ©2010
which the t-shirt of a character changes between shots) Broomfield replies ‘I don’t
know about the pasting, but you certainly cut’. He goes on to defend the truth claims
of his previous documentary in his trademark naïve manner, suggesting that he
doesn’t recall the specifics, but if he were driving a car for a long period of time, he
too would probably change his shirt. This scene appears to have little relevance to
Broomfield’s argument regarding the injustices of the death penalty, but it does
question – as many of his films do – the reality in front of the camera, highlighting the
fact that Broomfield’s films exist as little more than one modified perspective of an
event. By filming this scene and including it in the documentary, it seems that
Broomfield the filmmaker is emphasising the ironic nature of his films being
considered worthy of standing as evidence in court, thus highlighting the notion that a
documentary is a subjective mediation – or form - of reality. The argument could be
made that documentary has the power to create social or political change (Calhoun,
2003), but in order to do so, its limitations must be acknowledged. It is these
limitations that the performative mode – and in particular the films of Broomfield –
seem to emphasize.
Another aspect of Broomfield’s filming that could be deemed performative is the
tension between the realities of the filmmaker/auteur Nick Broomfield and the subject
‘Nick Broomfield’ that appears as a character in the documentary with his trademark
boom microphone and white shirt. (Bruzzi, 2000: 172). For example, Broomfield’s
voiceover is notoriously absent of enthusiasm or emotion – an effect which seems to
highlight the definite split between an omniscient filmmaker and an insistently
playful, inquisitive character. If documentary is to enter a contract between filmmaker
and spectator – a bond of trust (Beattie, 2004: 11) – then it seems that, by using
5
Alex Turner ©2010
somewhat discordant techniques of voiceover, director versus character and
acknowledgement of various levels of reality in play, Broomfield the filmmaker is
laying his cards down on the table.
There is one final aspect of performance to be discussed in Life and Death, which is
that of Aileen Wuornos herself. The main points of this category will be addressed
further in Capturing the Friedmans, but as previously stated, there is often some
degree of overlap between these two types of the performative mode.
The performance of Aileen herself is highlighted throughout the film; there are
several scenes in which we see her preparing for the camera by arranging her hair or
taking a moment to physically compose herself. Often, it appears as though she is
reciting previously written lines that she has prepared before the interview or
conversation takes place. In one particular scene (a clip of which is used for the
trailer) she is seen reacting to Broomfield’s question regarding how her life would
have turned out had she not needed to leave home and sleep in cars. Her monologue
appears to be a recital, most obviously when she begins to reel off a list of career
paths that would have been available to her, slipping up and asking ‘did I say
archaeology?’ It seems no coincidence that this scene uses an extreme close-up on
Aileen’s face to the point where it appears monstrous, detached and worn; the
combination of Aileen’s own willingness to perform, coupled with the penchant of
Broomfield’s camera for subjectivity creates ‘Aileen Wuornos’, the criminally insane
serial killer who evokes both revulsion and sympathy from the spectator. Her
monstrous face is the telltale sign of her trauma (Horeck, 2007: 144) and her words
poorly hide an ulterior motive that helps support Broomfield’s argument.
6
Alex Turner ©2010
The performance of Aileen in Life and Death is crucial to this argument but relies on
a single scene of a more putative nature in which Churchill (Broomfield’s co-author
for the film) continues to record as Aileen believes the camera to be turned off. Here,
she offers a reason for her performance and, arguably, a more truthful insight into her
beliefs; the conspiracies that she has constructed, along with her attempt to hide them,
show us another disturbing side of Aileen that supports Broomfield’s claim.
Interestingly, it is this scene in which the filmmaker maintains character and the
subject is seen in a more candid light which seems to stress both the importance of the
performance (without which we may simply see Aileen as insincere and lashing out)
and the notion that truth can often be, even without the intermediary of the camera,
subjective or elusive.
It is this subjective or elusive nature of truth that is found in Capturing the Friedmans
(Jarecki, 2003). In contrast to Life and Death, Jarecki’s film focuses much more on
the performance of the subjects (often overtly), with only occasional direct
interference from the director himself. The nature of the film itself seems to reflect the
nature of the performative mode and the original intentions of Jarecki in this case
seem irrelevant; the focus is on the finished piece, a documentary that emphasises the
notion that a definitive, single truth is either rare or misleading (Hammond, 2003:
A6).
Capturing the Friedmans is a combination of found footage (provided by the son,
David Friedman), talking head interviews, as well as narrative and editing techniques
including reconstructions that attempt to present a story to the audience which relies
7
Alex Turner ©2010
heavily on their own interpretation of the supposed facts. Cut together, the film tells
the story of the Friedman family, the victims and the authorities involved after father
and son, Arnold and Jesse, were arrested and charged for the molesting of children
during computer classes held at the Friedman’s home.
The most prevalent element of the performative mode in this film is the performance
of the subjects themselves, to the extent that one critic stated ‘the Friedman family’s
near pornographic obsession with home video suggests an onanistic existence in
which the boundaries between performance and real life have simply ceased to exist’
(Kermode, 2004). One of the most notable examples of this appears later in the film;
as the family begin arguing at the dinner table, the video camera continues to record,
apparently having been given a seat of its own. Here, the presence of the camera has
become so integral to the family that it is accepted into their daily rituals. The
eccentric nature of Jesse as a young adult and of Arnold as his father seems to blur the
line between documentary subject and fictional character; it becomes difficult for us
to imagine how they would act off-screen.
Jarecki often emphasises the performative nature of these characters through a host of
filmic techniques which thread the spectator into a narrative that seems to be driven
by its desire for subjectivity. For example, toward the beginning of the film, we see a
montage of establishing shots which show us a quiet suburban street cross fading into
an old video journal of David Friedman in his bedroom. The effect of these
establishing shots seems to emphasise the constructed nature of the documentary itself
by being planted directly in between David as an adult interviewee and participant of
the documentary and David as a member of the Friedman family during their crisis.
8
Alex Turner ©2010
For one of the few times in the entire film, Jarecki himself becomes an active
participant in the interview by questioning David about his family and his past. This
sequence appears crucial to the performative aspect of the film because it weaves both
categories of the mode together. Firstly, Jarecki is established here, simply by this
brief interjection during the interview, as the author of the perspective that the film is
constructed around. The sequence also sets up David as a crucial character in this
story by use of the montage that establishes a time and place that is the focus of the
documentary. By appearing in his video journals shortly after he has referenced a time
that he ‘doesn’t want to talk about’, David Friedman has become a main focus of the
documentary and the audience creates the narrative link between these three short
sequences.
David’s video journals provide further fuel for a narrative element to the
documentary; his plea (‘if you’re not me then you really shouldn’t be watching this’)
that addresses privacy and the spectator establishes a curiosity in the audience that
later branches out to the ensemble of interviews which refuse to provide any hard
evidence at all and are often edited to appear contradictory. For example, several shots
or scenes that Jarecki deems key information (such as the sexuality of Arnold’s
brother or the remarriage of Elaine to another man) are often kept back until the
audience feels relatively comfortable with a certain position. Though this thematic
ambiguity may appear frustrating and reflect Jarecki’s inability to maintain an
argument or deal with the complexities of the material (Arthur, 2003) it does appear to
highlight Bruzzi’s notion of documentary as ‘dialectical and open to reinterpretation’
(Bruzzi, 2000: 180).
9
Alex Turner ©2010
Unlike Broomfield, Jarecki does not appear as a character in his film, though his
presence is openly felt. As mediator, Jarecki includes a variety of filmic elements
including the establishing of a white, middle-class suburbia through the use of
metonymical shots of brilliant white picket fences and sprinklers in the garden. His
inclusion of talking heads and interviews with the family and investigation teams, as
well as non-diagetic music during the more distressing or emotive scenes and a brief,
abstract reconstruction seem to emphasise the lack of objectivity available in the film.
As everything contradicts the point that preceded it, effectively leaving the audience
to decide, Capturing the Friedmans seems to play as a courtroom melodrama without
entering the courtroom.
Like many true crime documentaries, Jarecki’s found footage, as well as the
interviews and archival footage, become part of the pool of vehicles for confession
that draw upon the iconography of fiction in order to dramatise the factual (Biressi,
2004: 412). Whether or not the documentary itself can be deemed entirely
performative, the Friedman family – and perhaps our reaction to them - seem to
demonstrate the idea that the intrusion of a camera inevitably alters the reality that
existed before it. In not presenting itself as anything other than subjective, Captuing
the Friedmans highlights one of the most important previously mentioned ideas of
Bruzzi, that, in documentary, ‘a pursuit towards unadulterated actuality is futile’
(Bruzzi, 2000: 68).
Ultimately, it seems that both the films of Broomfield and Jarecki discussed contain
elements that, together, provide an understanding of the performative documentary
10
Alex Turner ©2010
mode. Bruzzi often stresses the importance of acknowledging the bias of the film
medium and remembering that it is only a construction of reality (Bruzzi, 2000: 180).
If the performative documentary is built around the hidden aspect of performance then
in the work of Broomfield, this is demonstrated through the multiple levels of reality
that the character and filmmaker of Nick Broomfield bring into focus. In the case of
Jarecki, it is the performance of the subjects themselves that make us ever more aware
of the blurred line between reality and fiction.
11
Alex Turner ©2010
Bibliography
Arthur, Paul (2003) ‘True Confessions, Sort of: Capturing the Friedmans and the
Dilemma of Theatrical Documentary’ in Cineaste 28, 4 pp. 4-7
Beattie, Keith (2004) ‘’’Believe Me, I’m of the World”: Documentary
Representation’ in Documentary Screens: Nonfiction Film and Television
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan
Biressi, Anita (2004) ‘Inside/out: private trauma and public knowledge in true crime
documentary’ in Screen 45: 4 Winter
Bourdieu, Pierre (2007) Photography: A Middle-brow Art California: Stanford
University Press
Bruzzi, Stella (2000) ‘The performative documentary: Barker, Dineen, Broomfield’
and ‘The legacy of direct cinema’ in New Documentary: A Critical Introduction
London/New York: Routledge London/New York: Routledge
Calhoun, Dave (2003) ‘Camera, Lights, Justice’ in The Times London: 6. Academic
OneFile. Gale. Anglia Ruskin University. 30 Oct. 2008
Doherty, Thomas (2004) ‘Aileen Wuornos Superstar’
in Cineaste 29.3: 3(3). Academic OneFile. Gale. Anglia Ruskin University. 30 Oct.
2008
12
Alex Turner ©2010
Hammond, Pete (2003) ‘Capturing the Friedmans’ in Daily
Variety 281.49: A6(1). Academic OneFile. Gale. Anglia Ruskin University. 30 Oct.
2008
Horeck, Tanya (2007) ‘From documentary to drama: capturing Aileen Wuornos’ in
Screen 48:2 pp. 141-159
Kermode, Mark (2004) ‘Film: video nasty; A documentary of a family so
dysfunctional you wouldn't believe it if it weren't true’ in New Statesman
133.4683: 45(1). Academic OneFile. Gale. Anglia Ruskin University. 30 Oct. 2008
13
Alex Turner ©2010
Filmography
Aileen: Life and Death of a Serial Killer Nick Broomfield (2003) UK/USA
Aileen Wuornos: The Selling of a Serial Killer Nick Broomfield (1992) UK
Capturing the Friedmans Andrew Jarecki (2003) USA
Monster Patty Jenkins (2003) USA
14
Recommended