There's also many more considerations in this question as we have found out over the years.
As Andy points out, the Martin and Osa Johnson theatrical films have some fairly racist elements to them. We released SIMBA as the most inoffensive (and their most famous) film and worked with experts of the area to see what they thought. Most times when we release these documentaries/docudramas (and we have a lot of them in our Age of Exploration series that is in its 25th year), it's that many of these films are seen now -- even if they have white directors -- as literally home movies. There are the great grandfathers, grand aunts that they have only heard about or seen in pictures up on the screen. Over the years, we've had hundreds of these phone calls from the children who are very thankful. That doesn't excuse any racism -- though some should be seen in context of the time they were made, we should also consider that they were racist even back then -- but it does add a layer. The second concept is that in these films, there are cultural artifacts that are very valuable to their descendants. Some of the dances, the rituals, the art have been lost to time and modernization while some were outlawed. You can't understand them as well in photographs or writings from the time. We have a film CHANG that a film historian insisted it was racist. When I explained that it's a national treasure of Thailand (at the time, this was 1994 or so) and that the King played it every year on television since it was so popular, the historian declared that the people of Thailand obviously didn't understand racism! The third and most important concept is that some of these directors were as "modern" as we are and as in love and respectful of the cultures and people. It's always a mistake to consider previous generations as more primitive or less socially aware. (We're not doing so great with race in America these days either.) So! although the Martin and Osa theatrical films did have some typical old tribesmen trying to play a phonograph or open a bottle of beer (Flaherty started this with Nanook) because that's what they thought the American public wanted, it's little known that they also had at least six different version of the films and their "scientific" versions that they did for the American Museum of Natural History are incredible records of "lost" tribes and rituals. You can see the love they have for the African tribes in these films and in their huge number of photographs (many of their trips were sponsored by George Eastman and therefore, Kodak). I have the George Eastman House laserdisc with about 6000 of their photos and they are incredibly moving. So, there are many racist films by white directors over the history of cinema (Adam Sandler and the Navahos, just last week!) but I do think that they need to be evaluated not only by film historians but also members of the tribe, people who know the cultures extremely well, etc. We really try to work with the tribes and people involved in these films before we release to make sure we are not doing anything that would displease their communities, and they always find something that we can do to be more respectful in our release. Best regards, Dennis Doros Milestone Film & Video PO Box 128 / Harrington Park, NJ 07640 Phone: 201-767-3117 / Fax: 201-767-3035 / Email: milefi...@gmail.com Visit our main website! www.milestonefilms.com Visit our new websites! www.mspresents.com, www.portraitofjason.com, www.shirleyclarkefilms.com, To see or download our 2014 Video Catalog, click here <http://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0150/7896/files/2014MilestoneVideoCatalog.pdf?75> ! Support "Milestone Film" on Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Milestone-Film/22348485426> and Twitter <https://twitter.com/#!/MilestoneFilms>! On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Andy Ditzler <a...@andyditzler.com> wrote: > Nanook of the North is far from the cliche of a white man adventurer > making an anthropological film in a faraway place. Although it's been > disparaged that way at times, notably by Fatimah Tobing Rony, the film and > Flaherty have also been vigorously defended as a primary example of "shared > anthropology," not least by Jean Rouch. Another foundational film from this > era is "Grass," by Merian Cooper who went on to make King Kong. Grass is > not a cliched film either, for that matter. (Not that these films are free > of problems.) For more explicitly egregious examples from this era, I would > look at the films of Martin and Osa Johnson, such as "Borneo." One of their > films is imported directly (perhaps in full, I'm not sure) into Ken Jacobs' > "Star Spangled to Death," which is where I learned about them. Important to > note here that Martin and Osa currently have a clothing store chain named > after them here in the U.S. The legacy continues. > > Also look at Bunuel's "Land Without Bread" for a very wicked and very > early parody of exactly what you're describing. > > It's not so much that a given film personifies the cliche uncomplicatedly > (though I'm sure we can come up with more examples of that), but that much > of documentary filmmaking practice to this day replicates the conditions of > early anthropological (colonialist) uses of photography and film. > Non-diegetic music (usually a giveaway), slow-motion reaction shots > currently in vogue (of a subject saddened by tragedy, for instance), > "secret" filming (often staged as such, of course) - all of these > contribute to othering and other forms of exploitation (often ostensibly > with the opposite goal, but nonetheless...). > > Some of the most shocking current videos are those made for the "social > experiment" trend on Youtube, such as: > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiWxrpikWgs or > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YD1VT7YRJ5I. As with most things at this > level of toxicity, it would take awhile to unpack the interlocking > oppressions, both formal and societal, behind these videos and their > success. I will just note here that the self-reflexive techniques developed > by many 60s/70s ethnographic and documentary filmmakers in order to > critically examine the filmmaker's relation to subjects, are here deployed > for the opposite purpose. As I say, pretty toxic stuff. > > Regarding Jean Rouch, I might disagree with Jonathan that Rouch "turns the > 'other-izing' gaze of the ethnographic documentary to a group of white > Parisians" in Chronicle of a Summer. I think Chronicle is not about turning > the tables particularly, but about applying Rouch's concept of shared > anthropology in Paris rather than among the Songhay. If any tables are > turned in the film, it's on the filmmakers themselves, as evidenced by the > movie's final scene. Rouch's "Petit a Petit" (I think that's the one) does > have a hilarious scene in which Rouch's African collaborators take the > camera and mic out on the streets of Paris, turning the tables and treating > Parisians as anthropological subjects. They even take measurements of their > subjects on camera, in a parody of 19th-century anthropological > photography. > > I would agree that if you're looking for films that merit "the collective > eye-roll," Flaherty, Rouch, Gardner, Mead, Asch, Marshall et al are not > where I'd turn. > > Andy Ditzler > > > On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 1:19 PM, Jonathan Walley <wall...@denison.edu> > wrote: > >> Jean Rouch and Robert Garnder come to mind. Both were prolific >> ethnographic filmmakers, but for Rouch I’d recommend *Chronicle of a >> Summer* (1960), *The Mad Masters* (1955), and *Jaguar* (1967), and for >> Garnder *Dead Birds* (1964). Chronicle is especially interesting because >> Rouch turns the “other-izing” gaze of the ethnographic documentary to a >> group of white Parisians. >> >> There are plenty of others, but Rouch and Garnder stand as the major >> figures of ethnographic documentary, at least as far as white male >> filmmakers are concerned (obviously Trinh Minh-ha and Germaine Dieterlen, >> among others, are important filmmakers in this canon, not to mention >> Margaret Mead). But I wouldn’t say that their films deserve a collective >> eye roll; if the genre has declined into cliche (I’m not saying it has, >> just that I don’t know) I wouldn’t fault these filmmakers. Certainly when >> the representatives of one culture make films about another there are all >> sorts of potential pitfalls, but Rouch and Garnder approached the task >> knowingly and reflexively. I don’t believe they worked under the assumption >> that their acts of “putting minorities onscreen” was a simple matter (and >> are the African men and women in many of their films “minorities?” They >> would be a members of a racial minority in the U.S. or Europe, but not in >> Africa, I’d say). >> >> Hope this helps. >> Jonathan >> >> Dr. Jonathan Walley >> Associate Professor >> Department of Cinema >> Denison University >> wall...@denison.edu >> >> >> On May 1, 2015, at 12:54 PM, Chris Freeman < >> christopherbriggsfree...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I've seen them by independent filmmakers at micro cinema screenings. I >> mean what are the big ones that have come over the last 100 years of cinema >> that have made it a trope? I only know Nanook of the North. >> >> >> >> On Friday, May 1, 2015, <nicky.ham...@talktalk.net> wrote: >> >>> You seem to contradict yourself: you say 'whenever I see' etc, but then >>> ask 'what are some (of these films)'? If you know you've seen some, how >>> come you can't identify them? >>> >>> Nicky. >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Chris Freeman <christopherbriggsfree...@gmail.com> >>> To: frameworks@jonasmekasfilms.com >>> Sent: Fri, 1 May 2015 13:15 >>> Subject: [Frameworks] Ethnographic films / studies of The Other >>> >>> Whenever I see an ethnographic travelogue or some study of "the other" >>> by a white male at a screening, there's always a collective eye roll of >>> "great, another white male putting minorities on the screen." I know the >>> trope, but I don't actually know any of those specific cliche films. >>> What are some? >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> FrameWorks mailing >>> listFrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.comhttps://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >> FrameWorks mailing list >> FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com >> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> FrameWorks mailing list >> FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com >> https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks >> >> > > > -- > > Andy Ditzler > www.filmlove.org > www.johnq.org > Graduate Institute of the Liberal Arts, Emory University > > _______________________________________________ > FrameWorks mailing list > FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com > https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks > >
_______________________________________________ FrameWorks mailing list FrameWorks@jonasmekasfilms.com https://mailman-mail5.webfaction.com/listinfo/frameworks
