I believe one of the most important elements in the dissection of the documentary is the various levels of choice that an individual program must go through before it is displayed to the viewing public. There is the level of the individual film makers, who create the piece, on what they want to create or who will fund what subject matters and presentations. There is the top level of PBS (considering the American hierarchy), that holds most of the money distribution, and decides what sort of programmes to fund or buy. There's the government pressures involved on what sort of topics or perspectives gain presidence when using grants, etc, which often have guidelines for their use. As MM sensei brought up for my presentation, there are the pressures of the foreign governments and grants involved in their use, and the host country in what the film maker may 'access'. Then there is the local station, trying to gauge what the host community will most 'appreciate'.
In all of these decisions leave an evidence of discourse upon the Documentary Film on the Topic of Japan. Intersections with American Foreign Policy, in other words, things of American Interests. History that focuses on the time period of christian mercenaries entering into Japan, despite the apparently thematic focus upon 'ancient pre-Westernized' Japan in terms of typical cultural artifacts of the Samurai culture, etc. Then the 'spectacle of culture', the wacky and weird that titillates interest. Why do we approach Japan this way? Why is this sort of treatment of subject the only times we see Japan in Public Telelvision? Because someone thought that this would be 'educational', that this would be 'useful' to the audience/the company. Yet we do not see other treatments of the topic of Japan. We do not see the history of Japan, when there is not also a focus upon some key Chrysanthemum Sword concept, or an important Western Perspective point from which to 'not alienate' (I argue this is something of a weak idea) the audience, because otherwise the audience could not possibly relate to something so foreign.
Part of the question isn't just 'what are these documentaries saying', it's 'someone decided that these are the specific programs worth the 'viewers money'. If they are trying to, on a certain level, play to the forces that would put out the money for these programmes--the funding viewers, the funding acadamia, the funding governement, the fundiing company--then these choices reflect what they think these groups want, which reflects how they think it's appropriate to interact with the idea of 'Japan'.
Saturday, November 29, 2008
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Preparation for Presentation
Welcome everyone to the whiley world of Documentaries through the internet.
My project focuses on Documentaries about Japan found through public television. As a non commercial entity that is available, without fee, to an entire region Public Television has an overall feeling of authenticity to their programming, and an assumption of freedom in being able to show whatever they feel like without repercussions from commercial pressure. The small time cook gets air time, and the special antique roadshow, and the BBC has a high authority of having good news ethics and high quality documentary. However, I intend to show that public television documentaries are not always so ideally realized.
After all, they do rely on public funding and public interest in their programming.
I focused on PBS and BBC.These two stations share a lot of cross-pollination in their programming--PBS local stations show BBC programming, and their documentaries are often shared.
A brief overview of the history of Public Television is available as a timeline at Current.org, while a decent overview of BBC is at the Wikipedia entry.
There are four real kinds of documentary that I have been encountering.
The first is the newsreel current events documentary, often focusing on a special interest. Very recently aired, "Japan's About Face" is a documentary on the recent issues with Art 9 and the Self Defense Force in Japan. This sort of documentary tends to be more neutrally focused, but as can be seen in this film, will alide references to the host cultural at times. However, otherwise it is a rather excellent example of documentary in a more neutral mode.
Produced by Micha Fink, who has worked on other Wide Angle documentary reports before, this documentary focuses heavily on Japan--but not as much on the US involvement with the entire issue of the SDF. Wide Angle is funded by a lonf list of names familiar to PBS, including Ford Foundation, and various high profile foundations, and Mutual American Insurance. They claim to be the only international current events documentary program in the United States with "hard hitting interviews" meant to make up for the lack in American television.
Please view:
Part 1
Part 2
Part 4, 3:30 till 4:40
Part 7
Then you have the historical piece. The visuals are evocative of the Orientalist mindset, and the casting reminds me of jidaieki drama in Japan. Often this is strongest in the bookends of the episode, while the actual academic research may be sound. The situational time and place is emphasized in a stereotyped manner. These are heavily tied to academic research.
Japan The Secret Empire
Ep: The Way of the Samurai
Contributing Academics: Michael R. Asulin, Beatrice Bodart-Bailey, Michale Cooper,
And Eiko Ikegami, Herbert Plutshow, Luke Roberts, Cecilia Segawa Seiguchi, Harutoshi Takafuji, Makoto Takeuchi. They are from top universities of America, Europe, and Japan.
Part 1/6
from 6:pp to end
And this one from start to 4:40.
And the beginning of this part.
Then there is the Cultural Quality/Aspect focused piece. Here, the style of the documentary begins to range widely, and the hosts tend to be enthusiasts, or people who 'journey into an experience'. Topics include Geisha, Popular Culture, Samurai Sword Making, Samurai Style Martial Arts. There's often an emphasis on the scared past, Japan 'creating a unique historical treasure' which interacts with Japan's official use of 'cultural treasure' status given to craftsmen understood to be preserving traditional styles of significant importance to Japan. These are far greater in quantity.
Geisha Girl
Aired in 2006 on the BBC; this edition is taken from the Discovery Channel airingNew Link: Please watch at least the beginning ten or so minutes, the rest may also be interesting
Notice the emphasis on constraint, and the sense of a lost artform. There's this fascination with the idea of the Geisha trained girl. However, it's overall not that bad a documentary in terms of presenting information.
Fashion in Japan
This gives you a good idea of what sort of angle things can take.
Again, we have the identity of Japanese as constrained.
And in it's own category is Johnathon Ross, one of the most consistent personalites to show up in the recent range of BBC pop culture Japan documentaries. A very flamboyant and well known host in the UK, he starred as a self-proclaimed Japanophile in the series Japan-o-rama, a miniseries that delved into Japanese subculture one wacky piece at a time. Well known on the internets, he often makes broad claims about Japan and the Japanese, while constantly playing the wacky, crazy, edgy aspects of whatever he's talking about. He has a few newer series in the same vein, drawing off his authority as a host for earlier BBC cult film showings.
Typical Johnathon Ross:
Japanorama: Zoku (tribes); Watch at least half of this episode, at least until the Uniform section about five minutes in is over.
Watch Ep 1 part 1, for a feel
My project focuses on Documentaries about Japan found through public television. As a non commercial entity that is available, without fee, to an entire region Public Television has an overall feeling of authenticity to their programming, and an assumption of freedom in being able to show whatever they feel like without repercussions from commercial pressure. The small time cook gets air time, and the special antique roadshow, and the BBC has a high authority of having good news ethics and high quality documentary. However, I intend to show that public television documentaries are not always so ideally realized.
After all, they do rely on public funding and public interest in their programming.
I focused on PBS and BBC.These two stations share a lot of cross-pollination in their programming--PBS local stations show BBC programming, and their documentaries are often shared.
A brief overview of the history of Public Television is available as a timeline at Current.org, while a decent overview of BBC is at the Wikipedia entry.
There are four real kinds of documentary that I have been encountering.
The first is the newsreel current events documentary, often focusing on a special interest. Very recently aired, "Japan's About Face" is a documentary on the recent issues with Art 9 and the Self Defense Force in Japan. This sort of documentary tends to be more neutrally focused, but as can be seen in this film, will alide references to the host cultural at times. However, otherwise it is a rather excellent example of documentary in a more neutral mode.
Produced by Micha Fink, who has worked on other Wide Angle documentary reports before, this documentary focuses heavily on Japan--but not as much on the US involvement with the entire issue of the SDF. Wide Angle is funded by a lonf list of names familiar to PBS, including Ford Foundation, and various high profile foundations, and Mutual American Insurance. They claim to be the only international current events documentary program in the United States with "hard hitting interviews" meant to make up for the lack in American television.
Please view:
Part 1
Part 2
Part 4, 3:30 till 4:40
Part 7
Then you have the historical piece. The visuals are evocative of the Orientalist mindset, and the casting reminds me of jidaieki drama in Japan. Often this is strongest in the bookends of the episode, while the actual academic research may be sound. The situational time and place is emphasized in a stereotyped manner. These are heavily tied to academic research.
Japan The Secret Empire
Ep: The Way of the Samurai
Contributing Academics: Michael R. Asulin, Beatrice Bodart-Bailey, Michale Cooper,
And Eiko Ikegami, Herbert Plutshow, Luke Roberts, Cecilia Segawa Seiguchi, Harutoshi Takafuji, Makoto Takeuchi. They are from top universities of America, Europe, and Japan.
Part 1/6
from 6:pp to end
And this one from start to 4:40.
And the beginning of this part.
Then there is the Cultural Quality/Aspect focused piece. Here, the style of the documentary begins to range widely, and the hosts tend to be enthusiasts, or people who 'journey into an experience'. Topics include Geisha, Popular Culture, Samurai Sword Making, Samurai Style Martial Arts. There's often an emphasis on the scared past, Japan 'creating a unique historical treasure' which interacts with Japan's official use of 'cultural treasure' status given to craftsmen understood to be preserving traditional styles of significant importance to Japan. These are far greater in quantity.
Geisha Girl
Aired in 2006 on the BBC; this edition is taken from the Discovery Channel airingNew Link: Please watch at least the beginning ten or so minutes, the rest may also be interesting
Notice the emphasis on constraint, and the sense of a lost artform. There's this fascination with the idea of the Geisha trained girl. However, it's overall not that bad a documentary in terms of presenting information.
Fashion in Japan
This gives you a good idea of what sort of angle things can take.
Again, we have the identity of Japanese as constrained.
And in it's own category is Johnathon Ross, one of the most consistent personalites to show up in the recent range of BBC pop culture Japan documentaries. A very flamboyant and well known host in the UK, he starred as a self-proclaimed Japanophile in the series Japan-o-rama, a miniseries that delved into Japanese subculture one wacky piece at a time. Well known on the internets, he often makes broad claims about Japan and the Japanese, while constantly playing the wacky, crazy, edgy aspects of whatever he's talking about. He has a few newer series in the same vein, drawing off his authority as a host for earlier BBC cult film showings.
Typical Johnathon Ross:
Japanorama: Zoku (tribes); Watch at least half of this episode, at least until the Uniform section about five minutes in is over.
Watch Ep 1 part 1, for a feel
BBC Documentaries: Music in Japan
A more neutral attempt at discussing the music scene in Japan. The first interviewed person is not a Japanese band, but a British musician trying to break into the market, to present an interview, focusing on the diversity. "Western music is supposed to dominant the Japanese market. In fact, they prefer their own music..." and "Develop their own styles..."
"Most successful export is techno dance music."
Then move into talk of Japanese music pushing into the International Market. Then they shift into Visual Kei, and the fandom in Japan. "The Japanese music market is very fickle, changing all the time." Then into Morning Musume, the created singing group of girls.
What's interested is they push the created group idea, and the digital overendowed female idol.
Hiphop, "taking something from America and making something new." Wealthy kids--freedom to see society because they've been outside society and can see the society more easily, and then hang out with other levels of class. Interesting here are the comments from the interviewees about how Japanese society prevents people from saying how they feel, so they want to break past this with their music.
"Fushion of East and West." "West is becoming more and more like the Japanese market--rec companies, like manufactured things, easy to sell, easy to control." "It's very interesting to see idol groups are breaking very big in the american market...there's more individuality, more aggressive non-conformist music.
Ultimately not as interesting in terms of Western viewpoint of Japan and the discourse, which is interesting in and of itself. They do push, however, in their closing comments the idea of a fushon of East and Western style in the market, and a contrast between indivudal artists with an individual style and the rec companies enjoying easily manufactured sound.
"Most successful export is techno dance music."
Then move into talk of Japanese music pushing into the International Market. Then they shift into Visual Kei, and the fandom in Japan. "The Japanese music market is very fickle, changing all the time." Then into Morning Musume, the created singing group of girls.
What's interested is they push the created group idea, and the digital overendowed female idol.
Hiphop, "taking something from America and making something new." Wealthy kids--freedom to see society because they've been outside society and can see the society more easily, and then hang out with other levels of class. Interesting here are the comments from the interviewees about how Japanese society prevents people from saying how they feel, so they want to break past this with their music.
"Fushion of East and West." "West is becoming more and more like the Japanese market--rec companies, like manufactured things, easy to sell, easy to control." "It's very interesting to see idol groups are breaking very big in the american market...there's more individuality, more aggressive non-conformist music.
Ultimately not as interesting in terms of Western viewpoint of Japan and the discourse, which is interesting in and of itself. They do push, however, in their closing comments the idea of a fushon of East and Western style in the market, and a contrast between indivudal artists with an individual style and the rec companies enjoying easily manufactured sound.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
BBC Documentaries: Way of the Warrior (1883)
One of an eight part series, this episode focuses on Karate and an Okinawan practitioner. There are certain strange 'signifyers' for this documentary, such as the opening with two women doing a slow dance during the opening narration.
Way of the Samurai
Again we have the idea of 'traveling back into the past' when within Japan. "Even now, life in Japan is lived on the floor, so it's only natural practice begins here.", "a way of fighting they will never use," and an emphasis on the ideas of perfection, elegance, and focus. They combine the creation of the sword with the practice of the continued martial arts of sword combat, outlined as separate from kendo. "Intangible cultural asset."
Way of the Samurai
Again we have the idea of 'traveling back into the past' when within Japan. "Even now, life in Japan is lived on the floor, so it's only natural practice begins here.", "a way of fighting they will never use," and an emphasis on the ideas of perfection, elegance, and focus. They combine the creation of the sword with the practice of the continued martial arts of sword combat, outlined as separate from kendo. "Intangible cultural asset."
PBS Documentary: Losing the War with Japan (1991)
The economic scare of the American industry with Japan, before the economic bubble burst, was heavy in the media. That frontline picked this up doesn't really surprise me, but there is clearly a much heavier bias in these clips then the more recent, say, Japan's About Face.
PBS Documentaries: Campaign
Campaign, a documentary film produced and directed by Kazuhiro Soda, is one of the view documentaries I found in the PBS listings that was not headed by a non-Japanese director. This being so, I don't think it fits as well into my purview of PBS Documentaries from the American/British point of view, but I find it very interesting as part of the POV series on WHYY PBS.
The film can be found in it's entirety streamed here at the home website at PBS.
The film can be found in it's entirety streamed here at the home website at PBS.
Monday, November 10, 2008
PBS: Some Thoughts on the Effect of Viewer Appeal on Public Broadcasting Media
Public Broadcasting sustains itself on a combination of foundations, donations, and more specifically, viewer donations. According to current.org, Public Broadcasting grew out of University broadcasting on Radio waves in America, way way back. Since, it has retained a strong tie to the Academic world. Strong appeal to consumers is necessary since the broadcasting can be supported up to 20 percent in revenue through the donation drives. Therefore, the programs must rely upon the 'innate worth' perceived by the audience, Academics working with foundations, and companies who want a by-line with the programs and also donate money to certain works. The lack of commercials is supposed to create a 'free zone', but I do not see this zone as free of influence from political, cultural, and Academic pressures the way I might have five years ago. While there is certainly a certain amount of freedom without the commercial drive, we cannot assume everything we see is 'educational and unbiased.'
Much in the same vein as the supposedly neutral 'encyclopedias' that Said speaks on in Orientalism, the documentary is supposed to be a free zone for commentary. Yet there are still heavy overtures of certain discourses. Japan-o-rama, when combined with a WWII educational video for soldiers, is the inspiration for this project. In both, I saw a strong attempt at authority and yet a flimsy actual product, rather biased. Johnathon Ross is popular at the BBC, evidenced by the fact he has three series, one which ran in chunks of episodes for three seasons, at current, and his work is rather clear evidence of Orientalist discourse still alive in modern, pop and trendy documentary. More serious documentary, on terms of the newsreel, have a much more cut and dry, neutral position, but evidence of their home political climate is still very strong. See Japan's About Face as well as Campaign. Then you have the historical and 'traditional culture' documentary, which take all of the incense smoke images of old Japan, combine them with jidaieki visuals, and make a play out of the events. Academia's influence is very strong in the latter two, I feel, while the more pop culture documentary is often taken on by the amatuer, the non-Academic, and have a more distilled version of current 'popular' impressions from Britain and America about Japan.
Much in the same vein as the supposedly neutral 'encyclopedias' that Said speaks on in Orientalism, the documentary is supposed to be a free zone for commentary. Yet there are still heavy overtures of certain discourses. Japan-o-rama, when combined with a WWII educational video for soldiers, is the inspiration for this project. In both, I saw a strong attempt at authority and yet a flimsy actual product, rather biased. Johnathon Ross is popular at the BBC, evidenced by the fact he has three series, one which ran in chunks of episodes for three seasons, at current, and his work is rather clear evidence of Orientalist discourse still alive in modern, pop and trendy documentary. More serious documentary, on terms of the newsreel, have a much more cut and dry, neutral position, but evidence of their home political climate is still very strong. See Japan's About Face as well as Campaign. Then you have the historical and 'traditional culture' documentary, which take all of the incense smoke images of old Japan, combine them with jidaieki visuals, and make a play out of the events. Academia's influence is very strong in the latter two, I feel, while the more pop culture documentary is often taken on by the amatuer, the non-Academic, and have a more distilled version of current 'popular' impressions from Britain and America about Japan.
Reaction Critique: (BBC: Asian Invasion, Episode 1 Japan)
To begin with the title is edgy, overtones of Asian taking over the Western world strong. However, the discourse of Orientalism is still strong in Ross's dialogue, overtures to 'crazy, edgey' Japan combined with a sort of narrowed focus on only those films that fit the mold. He's talking pop culture, but he often seems to define the best of Japan as only from a certain section of the pop culture that fits the theme.
Comments During the Film follow:
At the end, he starts asking about the signifigence of gozilla--what he stands for. He asks if he's supposed to be Stalin in the remake of the first director. Godzilla is America and the Atom Bomb, on a certain level. Interesting he puts the focus on Communist Russia first. The director is amazed, and never thought about it--and doesn't really correct him, just says its a new idea to him.
He brings up the American version. "You're a thin man, you don't need to eat as much as me. I have a big hole in me." The Britain taking away from the man, it's extremely uncomfortable. The host is rather overbearing, considering. "Quintencensstial DVD shop"--It's HMV, an international store, or rather, a British one. I think of Tsutaya and Book Off? Britian as universal everywhere, trying to tie things together? The films he draws out seem to be charactures of the anime genre in the usual types--the sports manga, the shounen super fighter, "only coming from a culture that habitually bets on fights between stag beetles" wonky seinen crazyness, ..actually, generally, these are filsm with rather ridiculous premises that he's presenting as the best of the current crop of film. But these are the current crop of indy cult film, and that's not made clear. He treats them as all Japan has to offer in terms of film, comparable to Akira Kurosawa, and that this is a mark of the decline of Japan because of it's addiction to the West, because it's catering to Otaku. Because it's not longer 'pure' Japan, and for him as a Japanophile, this is a shame.
I see this as parallel to Said's Orientalists, who searched for a pure form of what they love, and dissapointment.
I wonder why he doesn't mention recent hits like Nana (which is shoujo, and less crazy in essence), and other films.
But there's hope in one specific example (Lily Chou Chou) that talks about idols, group think, suicide, etc.
Then there's everybody's favourite, Beat Takeshi.
Then Takeshi Miike. Happiness of the Katakakuris (hello Film Class!), Gozu, etc. The man likes to combine weirdness with normalcy.
He calls this past, present, and future. And then he moves to Anime, as the most important. "Typically perverse Japanese twist."
Akira, Steamboy; Miyazaki, who is enshrined in terms of media, with "leisurely style", but he always brings it back to 'edgeyness'; Mamoru Oshii, Ghost in the Shell "elevates from sweaty otaku to high art" (not mentioned: Paprika, Millenium Actress) state of the art, though our expert can't understand, but he respects it, with an odd stiffness.
"Intentional ambiquity of the original Japanese." with the obscurity of the subtitles, he says. Nihon as distant, strange, unintelligible. I call it poor translation--the subtitles are a little less then awesome, what they show. Why even mention this? He always calls the techniques of the director 'emptiness', techno, or distant, whereas I feel the director may think differently.
"Still looks distincitively Japanese to me", "a little something extra going on." And it's okay the present gen isn't as good as the older--but we don't know who that is. "Japan itself, showing the tension between technology and tradition." He also implies that the current newer crop of directors are somehow emotionless.
Comments During the Film follow:
At the end, he starts asking about the signifigence of gozilla--what he stands for. He asks if he's supposed to be Stalin in the remake of the first director. Godzilla is America and the Atom Bomb, on a certain level. Interesting he puts the focus on Communist Russia first. The director is amazed, and never thought about it--and doesn't really correct him, just says its a new idea to him.
He brings up the American version. "You're a thin man, you don't need to eat as much as me. I have a big hole in me." The Britain taking away from the man, it's extremely uncomfortable. The host is rather overbearing, considering. "Quintencensstial DVD shop"--It's HMV, an international store, or rather, a British one. I think of Tsutaya and Book Off? Britian as universal everywhere, trying to tie things together? The films he draws out seem to be charactures of the anime genre in the usual types--the sports manga, the shounen super fighter, "only coming from a culture that habitually bets on fights between stag beetles" wonky seinen crazyness, ..actually, generally, these are filsm with rather ridiculous premises that he's presenting as the best of the current crop of film. But these are the current crop of indy cult film, and that's not made clear. He treats them as all Japan has to offer in terms of film, comparable to Akira Kurosawa, and that this is a mark of the decline of Japan because of it's addiction to the West, because it's catering to Otaku. Because it's not longer 'pure' Japan, and for him as a Japanophile, this is a shame.
I see this as parallel to Said's Orientalists, who searched for a pure form of what they love, and dissapointment.
I wonder why he doesn't mention recent hits like Nana (which is shoujo, and less crazy in essence), and other films.
But there's hope in one specific example (Lily Chou Chou) that talks about idols, group think, suicide, etc.
Then there's everybody's favourite, Beat Takeshi.
Then Takeshi Miike. Happiness of the Katakakuris (hello Film Class!), Gozu, etc. The man likes to combine weirdness with normalcy.
He calls this past, present, and future. And then he moves to Anime, as the most important. "Typically perverse Japanese twist."
Akira, Steamboy; Miyazaki, who is enshrined in terms of media, with "leisurely style", but he always brings it back to 'edgeyness'; Mamoru Oshii, Ghost in the Shell "elevates from sweaty otaku to high art" (not mentioned: Paprika, Millenium Actress) state of the art, though our expert can't understand, but he respects it, with an odd stiffness.
"Intentional ambiquity of the original Japanese." with the obscurity of the subtitles, he says. Nihon as distant, strange, unintelligible. I call it poor translation--the subtitles are a little less then awesome, what they show. Why even mention this? He always calls the techniques of the director 'emptiness', techno, or distant, whereas I feel the director may think differently.
"Still looks distincitively Japanese to me", "a little something extra going on." And it's okay the present gen isn't as good as the older--but we don't know who that is. "Japan itself, showing the tension between technology and tradition." He also implies that the current newer crop of directors are somehow emotionless.
BBC Documentaries: Asian Invasion (Japan)
Produced and hosted by the same man who sort of started me off in this direction, Johnathan Ross of Japan-o-Rama, this is a series looking at Asian cinema through the critical centers of Japan, Hong Kong, and Korea produced in the UK. Here's the first part of the Japan section, the first of the series. It is significant he begins here. In 2007, Johnathon Ross was best known for the third season of Japan-o-rama, a pop-culture fest focused on Japan, and he introduces himself as a biased 'Japanophile'. He's drawing in watchers from Japan-o-rama, and much of the production feels the same. He's pushing that same crowd, and is going to pull them through htis peisode into the others--an overview of theme that I think is important in dissecting what he is doing.
Phrases such as "violent even for Eastern audiences" are particularly telling about discourse. American film is often criticized as the most violent and accessible in the industry--what does it mean when he says, paraphrased, "violent even for Eastern audiences" when discussing his first director? He's playing up the drama, or does this play into Morris's idea of the Male Japan and the Female Japan, used when convenient, and this is Male Japan (of war and Imperialism) overtones?
Here's the first part of the Japan Episode.
Phrases such as "violent even for Eastern audiences" are particularly telling about discourse. American film is often criticized as the most violent and accessible in the industry--what does it mean when he says, paraphrased, "violent even for Eastern audiences" when discussing his first director? He's playing up the drama, or does this play into Morris's idea of the Male Japan and the Female Japan, used when convenient, and this is Male Japan (of war and Imperialism) overtones?
Here's the first part of the Japan Episode.
Some Priliminary Thoughts on Public Television Documentaries about Japan
I'm pretty sure one of the things behind the discourse in Documentaries is the easy push button for viewer recognition. Using short-cuts of wide-spread held images of the concepts or place being addressed to communicate information, instead of focusing on the reality of these images, or addressing their high levels of constructed meaning. In a way it is a cheap shot used to communicate to the audience, either a sense of place, time, or object, or as a dramatic, interest creating ploy to make the viewer watch by playing on the long-held discourse of Asia as exotic, distant, intriquing, interesting. If the place is exotic, we want to learn more about the 'strange, foreign ways'. However, not all documentaries use these sorts of ploys. There are also political factors, such as the sensitivity of the Atom Bomb, the American Occupation, etc that for an American audience may be elided or not mentioned in a sort of memory open space. I haven't decided how much of this seems to be a sort of political pressure in not wanting to create a controversy that may prevent the documentary from showing (since we are talking about public television), or not wanting to bring up or get into often complicated issues. (Am I giving too much credit there?)
//edit
There seem to be certain dominant aesthetiques in (recent, public television, focused) documentary on Japan--there is the super pop tech bright light, there is the old style jidaieki drama style, and then the more straightforward 'is as is' style.
///Edit
Also, how much of the aesthetique is appropriation of existing aesthetic in the culture viewed to create Theme in the documentary, how much is use of inner cultural signs for the topic, and how much is just cheese?
//edit
There seem to be certain dominant aesthetiques in (recent, public television, focused) documentary on Japan--there is the super pop tech bright light, there is the old style jidaieki drama style, and then the more straightforward 'is as is' style.
///Edit
Also, how much of the aesthetique is appropriation of existing aesthetic in the culture viewed to create Theme in the documentary, how much is use of inner cultural signs for the topic, and how much is just cheese?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
