Advertisement

Commission, Position and Production: Intent and Intervention in Minority Language Programmes

  • Diane MacleanEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter uses documentaries to examine the processes, thinking and practices that a filmmaker undergoes, from the initial idea through to production. It will consider how the documentary filmmaker’s ideas and ‘intent’ is mediated and changed by commissioning practices and production constraints, and will further consider how the ‘authorial voice’ is heard despite these restrictions. The chapter will examine the ‘situatedness’ of the filmmaker—their cultural positioning, background and professional training—and how this frames their ideas, subject choices, content and the aesthetic execution of their films. Through a self-reflexive analysis of the pre- to post-production process, it will consider how ideas and concepts move organically, or responsively, to external issues, including further research, location recceing, production team influence and experience and, crucially, the act of the creative process itself. Subjectivity and intervention will be discussed in the context of Bruzzi’s (New Documentary. London/New York: Routledge, 2000) notion of ‘truth claim’ and Nichols’ (2001) discourse on ‘voice’. Ponech’s (Film Theory and Philosophy, R. Allen and M. Smith (Eds.). New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997) work on producer intent and non-fiction films will inform an investigation into the epistemological status of the producer, knowledge generation and ask who mediates and ‘constructs’ this knowledge, and how, creatively, this ‘construction’ is negotiated.

References

  1. Altman, R. (1999). Film/Genre. London: British Film Institute Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barnouw, E. (1974). Documentary: A History of the Non-Fiction Film. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Blaikie, A. (2001). Photographs in the Cultural Account: Contested Narratives and Collective Memory in the Scottish Islands. Sociological Review, 49(3), 345–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bruzzi, S. (2000). New Documentary. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Carroll, N. (1996). Theorising the Moving Image. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Carroll, N. (1997). Fiction, Non-fiction, and the Film of Presumptive Assertion: A Conceptual Analysis. In R. Allen & M. Smith (Eds.), Film Theory and Philosophy (pp. 173–202). New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cormack, M. (2008). Gaelic, the Media and Scotland. In N. Blain & D. Hutchison (Eds.), The Media in Scotland (pp. 213–226). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Drew, R. (2006). Narration Can Be a Killer. In M. Cousins & K. Macdonald (Eds.), Imagining Reality. The Faber Book of Documentary (pp. 271–273). London: Faber & Faber.Google Scholar
  9. Flaherty, R. (dir.). (1922) Nanook of the North. Criterian Collection.Google Scholar
  10. Flaherty, R. (dir.). (1934) Man of Aran. Gaumont British Picture Corporation of America.Google Scholar
  11. Frow, J. (2005). Genre. Oxon/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Gaut, B. (1997). Film Authorship and Collaboration. In R. Allen & M. Smith (Eds.), Film Theory and Philosophy (pp. 149–172). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Godmilow, J., & Shapiro, A.-L. (1997). How Real Is the Reality in Documentary Film? History and Theory, 36(4), 80–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Grierson, J. (1979). Grierson on Documentary (Forsyth Hardy, Ed.). London: Faber.Google Scholar
  15. Holmes, P. (dir.). (2011). Leasan sa Bhàs (Lesson in Death). BBC Alba.Google Scholar
  16. Kilborn, R., & Izod, J. (1997). An Introduction to Television Documentary Confronting Reality. Manchester/New York: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Livingston, P. (1997). Cinematic Authorship. In R. Allen & M. Smith (Eds.), Film Theory and Philosophy (pp. 132–148). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Maclean, D. (dir.). (2014). Balaich na h-Àirde (The Aird Boys). BBC Alba.Google Scholar
  19. Martin-Jones, D. (2010). Islands at the Edge of History: Landscape and the Past in Recent Scottish-Gaelic Films. In D. Iordanova, D. Martin-Jones, & B. Vidal (Eds.), Cinema at the Periphery Contemporary Approaches to Film and Television Series. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Miller, S. (dir.). (2007). Seachd: The Inaccessible Pinnacle. Young Films.Google Scholar
  21. Neale, S. (2000). Questions of Genre. In R. Stam & T. Millar (Eds.), Film and Theory: An Anthology (pp. 157–178). Malden/Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  22. Nichols, B. (1991). Representing Reality. Bloomington/Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Nichols, B. (1993). “Getting to Know You …” Knowledge, Power, and the Body. In M. Renov (Ed.), Theorizing Documentary (pp. 174–191). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Nichols, B. (2001). Introduction to Documentary. Bloomington/Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Paget, D. (2011). No Other Way to Tell It: Dramadoc/Docudrama on Television (2nd ed.). Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Petrie, D. (2000). The New Scottish Cinema. In M. Hjort & S. Mackenzie (Eds.), Cinema and Nation. New York/Oxford: Routledge.Google Scholar
  27. Ponech, T. (1997). What Is Non-fiction Cinema? In R. Allen & M. Smith (Eds.), Film Theory and Philosophy (pp. 203–219). New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rabinowitz, P. (1993). History, Documentary and the Ruins of Memory. History and Theory, 32(2), 119–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Renov, M. (1993). Theorizing Documentary. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. Rosenthal, A., & Corner, J. (2005). New Challenges for Documentary. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Rouch, J. (1978). The Politics of Visual Anthropology: An Interview with Jean Rouch. Cineaste, viii(4), 16–24.Google Scholar
  32. Rouch, J. (2003). Ciné-Ethnography. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  33. Sarris, A. (1962). Notes on the Auteur Theory in 1962. Film Culture, 27, 1–8.Google Scholar
  34. Sellors, P. (2007). Collective Authorship in Film. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 65(3), 263–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Stevenson, G. (dir.). (1996). An Iobairt (The Sacrifice). Camus Productions.Google Scholar
  36. Tarkovsky, A. (dir.). (1975). The Mirror. Kino Video.Google Scholar
  37. Vertov, D. (1992). Kino-Eye: The Writings of Dziga Vertov. California: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  38. Winston, B. (1995). Claiming the Real: The Documentary Film Revisited. London: British Film Institute Publishing.Google Scholar
  39. Winston, B. (2000). Lies, Damn Lies and Documentaries. London: British Film Institute Publishing.Google Scholar
  40. Winston, B. (2008). Claiming the Real: Documentary, Grierson and Beyond (2nd ed.). London: British Film Institute Publishing.Google Scholar
  41. Youdelman, J. (2005). Narration, Invention, History. In A. Rosenthal & J. Corner (Eds.), New Challenges for Documentary (pp. 397–408). Manchester/New York: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Edinburgh Napier UniversityEdinburghUK

Personalised recommendations