|
CVA
Newsletter
2 (1994): 15-18.
On the Trail of
the Native's Point of View: The
Göttingen
International Ethnographic Film Festival,
Göttingen, Germany, May 11-15, 1994.
A Home for Ethnographic
Film
For five days, filmmakers
and anthropologists from over twenty different countries watched
ethnographic films at the second Göttingen International
Ethnographic Film Festival at the Institut für den Wissenschaftlichen
Film. Göttingen, an old university town in Germany, offered
a peaceful setting for an eclectic selection of films and videos
from Asia, Africa, North America, and Europe. Under clear skies,
the atmosphere of the festival was casual and friendly, more
reminiscent of the Robert Flaherty Film Seminar than other festivals
of ethnographic film, such as the Festival dei Popoli in Florence,
the Margaret Mead Film Festival in New York, or the Bilan du
Film Ethnographique in Paris. From May 11-15, 1994, Göttingen
drew an international audience of 300 scholars and filmmakers,
plus a collection of students mostly from Germany. There were
no concurrent screenings, so all those in attendance saw the
same films, allowing for good conversations at meal times. In
addition, most of the festival guests were staying at one of
two different hotels, contributing to the cohesive ambiance.
The festival party, with dancing until three o'clock in the
morning on May 14, confirmed this feeling of camaraderie.
Student Film Competition
The festival opened
with a Student Film Competition, which consisted of twelve videotapes,
in competition for a Hi-8mm video camera donated by SONY, one
of the sponsors. Many of the productions were shot in video,
and most of these were shot on semi-professional or small-format
amateur equipment. The student screenings were well-attended
and there was a good deal of speculation and interest in the
competition. Most of the festival goers thought that the separate
student competition was a good idea. In general, the student
films were the same quality as the films in the main selection,
which makes one wonder why they were segregated. During the
award presentation, anthropologist Asen Balikci stated that
many of the student works 'could have been easily included in
the main festival program'.
The Student Film
Competition included videos from Germany, the United States,
the Netherlands, Palestine, Denmark, Hungary, Portugal, Iran,
and Great Britain. The thesis works of M.A. students from the
Granada Centre at Manchester University in England dominated
the student competition, including Hanna Musleh's Sahar's
Wedding (1992), Charlie Clay's Pepsi War (1992),
Kristin MacLeod's Bash Street (1993), and Catarina Alves
Costa's Back to the Homeland (1992), the deserving winner
of the competition. The dominant style of these productions--and
hence the style counseled, however informally, by the selection
committee--involved observational sequences combined with interviews,
sound segments of which were occasionally used over images.
Voice-over commentary was comparatively rare.
Many of the student
videographers were taping their 'own' cultures, as was the case
with Ali Attar's I Swear, I Love Spring (1994), about
a harvest festival prohibited in years past by the Iranian government;
Amanda Crane's Many Will Come (1994), a University of
Southern California production about Catholics in Santa Maria,
California; Margriet Jansen's Witchcraft as Religion
(1993), about new age sects in Denmark; Zoltan Füredi's
Rushes (1993), a parable about homelessness in Hungary;
MacLeod's Bash Street, a portrait of a homeless man in
Manchester; Costa's Back to the Homeland, about Portuguese
immigrants returning during vacation to their homes; and Musleh's
Sahar's Wedding about the ritual of marriage in Palestine.
Musleh nicely combined insider and outsider perspectives to
explore family life in the context of political upheaval. Rounding
out the Student Film Competition were My Bisnis is Soup
(1994), Sebastian Eschenbach and Karin Klenke's affectionate
portrait of a street seller in Bali, Indonesia, a promising
first video; Peter Lutz's Out of Place (1993), about
Bosnian refugees in Sweden; Thomas Hammer's Carnival in Wasungen
(1993), about a government-sponsored festival in the former
East Germany; and Lone Sahl Liboriussen's Almighty, Satan
and the Boys (1992), a look at a street painter in Ghana.
Few of the student
works offered explanations or interpretations; decidedly the
emphasis was on showing versus telling. All too often, however,
the showing wasn't enough as directors referred viewers to their
written M.A. theses for answers to questions about context and
interpretation. To my knowledge, none of them brought copies
of the written theses to Göttingen. Did the absence of
analysis in the videos result from a hesitation to interpret
other cultures, an unwillingness to advance an outsider's perspective,
and a fear of making judgments?
Some directors argued
that analysis is anathema to the medium, that film and video
succeed best at conveying a sense of place, mood, tempo, and
feeling. Peter Lutz, whose Out of Place showed a stylistic
mastery that eluded many of the other student videos, stated
outright what was implicit in many of the directors' comments.
'Film,' according to Lutz, 'represents feelings better than
ideas'. Any Hollywood producer would say the same thing. However,
visual anthropologists should remain committed to a cinema of
ideas, a cinema as theoretically informed, as thoughtfully constructed,
and as empirically rich as written ethnography. Costa's Back
to the Homeland, through judicious interviews and editing,
managed to provide a richer sense of context and analysis than
most of the other student productions. The Jury awarded Costa's
35-minute video for the clarity of its presentation, the use
of purely cinematic techniques, and the absence of a 'miserabilist
philosophy prevalent in many social documentaries'. Speaking
for the Jury, Balikci noted that 'one almost feels a feminine
touch,' a dubious compliment that underscored the absence of
works addressing issues of gender at the Göttingen festival.
Question-and-Answer
Sessions
The festival organizers
allowed twenty minutes for public discussion after each screening,
an excellent idea that unfortunately didn't live up to its promise.
The discussion was not always well facilitated. Selection committee
members read their statements justifying the works shown, but
these comments rarely provoked interesting responses. Questions
were often predictable and one festival goer privately listed
five proto-typical questions: 1) Did the subjects like the film?,
2) How did the camera influence the subjects' behavior?, 3)
What kind of camera did the filmmaker use?, 4) How long did
the filming last?, 5) Is it ethically defensible to make films
about other people? To my knowledge, no one ever asked what
anthropological paradigm--functionalism, structuralism, interpretive
anthropology, post-modernism, etc.--the directors favored.
Another participant
suggested that the discussions would have benefited from a charismatic,
and opinionated, figure who could galvanize the debate. The
exchanges after the projections were
16
simply question-and-answer
sessions rather than actual dialogues. In addition, discussion
generally lagged in the absence of the filmmaker. Conference organizers
repeatedly apologized for the few filmmakers who did not attend,
as if nothing could really be debated without the director. But
films, like ethnographic monographs, are made to be analyzed and
criticized in the absence of their authors. Anyone who has ever
heard a question-and-answer session with Frederick Wiseman knows
that a more fruitful exchange would take place without him. Furthermore,
the meanings of films and videos lie not in the intentions of
the directors, but in the minds of the audience. However, at Göttingen,
the absence of the filmmaker guaranteed that little would be said
during the public discussion.
The festival was
conducted in English. This fact probably contributed to the
reticence of some viewers to participate in the public discussions.
Given the international character of ethnographic films and
their audiences, directors should consider subtitling their
films systematically, in whatever language they deem appropriate.
Even videos shot in English--such as MacLeod's portrait of a
homeless man in Manchester or my own Hacklebarney Tunes:
The Music of Greg Brown (with Andrea Truppin, 1993) about
a singer/songwriter from the midwestern United States--were
not automatically comprehensible to native speakers. In this
way, subtitling and titling could become a dramatic component
of visual anthropology, rather than an afterthought.
Not surprisingly,
the best discussions took place during the breaks between films,
the breakfasts, lunches, and dinners that festival goers shared
at the IWF cafeteria and elsewhere in Göttingen. Each day,
viewers could count on a consistent group of people with whom
to share reactions. At these times, vast quantities of coffee
and German cakes were served up by the amiable IWF staff. The
festival offered films and tapes from nine o'clock each morning
until eleven o'clock each night, a rigorous schedule that didn't
allow much time to rest. Anthropologist Nashko Kriznar admitted,
guiltily, that he went to buy a postcard and missed seeing two
films as a result.
The Place of Voice-Over
Narration
Purely observational
works--apart from Frederick Wiseman's Zoo (1993) and
Füredi's Rushes--were nowhere to be found at the
festival, while voice-over narration appeared to be strictly
verboten. Unlike many of the productions shown, Füredi's
short video, his first, exhibited a rare unity of style and
purpose. Almost a Rouchian single-take experiment, Rushes
ambled unsteadily from the inside of a wealthy house in Budapest
to observe, through a forest of trees, an opulent party taking
place next door. The videographer then proceeded, in a continuous
long take, to an encampment where a homeless man was sleeping
under a makeshift roof. Without any dialogue or spoken words,
but with considerable suspense, Rushes made a compelling
statement about the social injustice of contemporary Budapest.
The video ended with a freeze frame of the young director reflected
in the window of his home, an image implicating him in the social
hierarchy.
By rejecting voice-over
narration, visual anthropologists at Göttingen boxed themselves
into a stylistic corner; many asserted that commentary was inherently
uncinematic and, worse, essentially authoritarian. Nevertheless,
in the question-and-answer periods after the projections, typical
complaints about the lack of context surfaced, especially in
the case of Clay's Pepsi War, which contained some exciting
footage of ritual warfare in New Guinea, but little explanation.
Clay's principal informant was a tribal leader with a Ph.D.,
an arrangement that promised an intriguing mix of insider and
outsider perspectives. Unfortunately, the sensationally-titled
video failed to deliver. Clay admitted that he had 'no idea
what was going on' while he was filming, though he referred
to Bob Connolly and Robin Anderson's Black Harvest (1991)
and Robert Gardner's Dead Birds (1963) as models for
his work. One wonders if good examples of voice-over narration,
such as Gardner's, may be taught to students so that both didacticism
and lack of context may be overcome.
In the introduction
to the festival catalogue, anthropologist Peter Crawford reiterated
the selection committee's disappointment with films that were
marred by heavy voice-over narration. Ethnographic film, still
very much in its infancy as a coherent body of work, appears
destined to recapitulate the stylistic evolution of documentary
film. In the 1960s, observational cinema--in the work of Robert
Drew, Richard Leacock, and the Maysles brothers--reacted against
what Drew dubbed 'illustrated lectures,' pictures with continuous
voice-over commentary, still the mainstay of television journalism.
Similarly, when Leacock taught documentary filmmaking in the
1970s, voice-over narration was considered an unacceptable technique.
However, American documentaries in the 1980s, such as Jill Godmilow's
Far From Poland (1985), Ross McElwee's Sherman's March
(1985), and Michael Moore's Roger and Me (1989), rediscovered
the possibilities of voice-over, using personal, ironic, and
interpretive commentary to counterpoint the synchronous images
and sounds.
Obviously, voice-over
narration need not be the only filmic technique for making interpretive
statements about culture. Any fluent camera, sound, and editing
style offers certain perspectives on reality. During this period
of growth, ethnographic film should embrace a wide variety of
styles. In the wake of cinéma-vérité,
and Jean Rouch's praise of the participant camera, nearly all
of the productions exhibited at Göttingen used hand-held
cameras and available light, as if artificial lights and tripods
were unfilmic or inauthentic devices. While a tripod was considered
bad, handheld camerawork that appeared 'as steady as a tripod'
was lauded. Imagine assuming about fiction film that Miklós
Jancsó's roving camera was, by definition, better at
representing reality than Yasujirõ Ozu's fixed camera.
Rouch at least acknowledged that his camerawork in Madame
L'Eau (1993) was almost willfully bad and that visual anthropologists
should beware of the trap of producing beautiful images.
Gloriously shot,
using almost exclusively natural light, David MacDougall's Time
of the Barmen (1993) offered a pastoral elegy to the lives
of Sardinian shepherds, a way of life gradually giving way to
agro-tourism and economic development. This 16mm film relied
on long sequence shots with very little dialogue, or action,
to slowly detail the worlds of three generations of shepherds,
deliberately structured to explore historical change. MacDougall
was invited to make a film about shepherds by the Instituto
Superiore Regionale Etnografico of Sardinia. He emphasized during
the question-and-answer session that, since he didn't speak
the local language, he decided to focus more on non-verbal communication.
The first twenty
minutes of Time of the Barmen introduced the viewer to
the sounds and sights of the Sardinian mountains, and the work
of the shepherds, without any auxiliary commentary or interviews.
There was even less dialogue than in Wiseman's Zoo, which,
incidentally, consisted primarily of anthropomorphic conversations
between keepers and animals. MacDougall gradually introduced
interview material later in the film to flesh out ideas implicit
in the scenes of everyday life. In this documentary, MacDougall
moved away from the intertitles and Brechtian interrogative
devices that he employed in earlier films, such as The Wedding
Camels (with Judith MacDougall, 1980), for a seamless narrative
style that used shifts from scene to scene for contrast and
comment, not unlike Wiseman's work.
17
In Zoo,
Wiseman, too, examined the relationship between nature and culture,
between human beings and their animal brethren, issues he touched
upon in Primate (1974) and Meat (1976). However,
Wiseman's increasingly diffuse observational style left too much
up to the audience at Göttingen. Very few viewers at the
festival--trained anthropologists, filmmakers, and students--offered
interpretive statements when asked what they thought about Zoo;
most said that it was about 'how a zoo works'. A study of anthropomorphism,
as well as the control of nature, Zoo delineated a totally
artificial environment. The director insisted upon the fact that
every twig, every tree, every part of the ecosystem was pruned
and arranged.
Wiseman constructed
an Orwellian world in which Animal Farm encountered 1984;
the activities of the animals were relentlessly observed, noted,
photographed, and documented at every stage of life and death,
in a rigorous scientific manner, by Homo Sapiens. In
an ironic twist near the end of the film, typical of Wiseman's
dark sense of humor, unleashed domestic dogs ran 'wild' in the
zoo, killing several animals, and were mercilessly tracked down
and shot by the personnel. Unplanned actions--eruptions of the
natural order, so to speak--were clearly not tolerated. The
final sequences focused on the totalitarian regulation of reproduction
as eggs were taken away from a crocodile's underground nest,
counted, weighed, measured, photographed, and placed in an incubator,
while a male wolf was castrated, in a surprisingly amusing scene,
by a group of women veterinarians. Wiseman addressed the manipulation
of nature more astutely in Primate, however, which chronicled
experiments devoted to controlling violence and sexual behavior
in our closest animal relatives.
'The Native's
Point of View'
Most of the directors,
many of whom were in attendance--one of the strengths of the
festival--claimed that the mixture of observational scenes and
interviews best represented the native's point of view. (No
one at Göttingen addressed the problematic nature of these
terms.) Copperworking in Santa Clara (1989/1993), Beate
Engelbrecht and Manfred Krüger's elegant depiction of a
Mexican craft in Santa Clara, Michoacán, was exemplary
in this regard, combining observational sequences with interviews
used exclusively in voice-over. Barbara Keifenheim's Und
du bildest dir ein, frei zu sein (1991/1992) sensitively
explored the world view of a German homeless man living in Paris
through interviews and scenes of everyday life in the streets.
Few of the works offered any kind of explanation or interpretation
from the ethnographer's point of view. As a result, some of
the distinctiveness of the anthropologist's voice--one of the
justifications for an ethnographic cinema--was lost. The notion
that only the native's point of view is valid represents one
legacy of anti-colonialist sentiment in anthropology. In this
model of ethnographic film, the anthropologist becomes simply
a transmitter, a transparent medium, a far cry from James Clifford's
and George Marcus' call for a dialogic ethnography, much less
Jay Ruby's demand for a reflexive anthropology.
Paul Henley, a professor
of anthropology at the Granada Centre, stated categorically,
after the projection of his work Faces in the Crowd (1994),
an entertaining look at hard-core fans of the British royal
family, that the 'aim of anthropology is to present the native's
point of view,' an assumption that went unchallenged during
the festival. This assumption precludes not only a critical
anthropology, but an interpretive one. The native's point of
view is certainly necessary, but not sufficient, to an anthropological
cinema. Like many of the Manchester tapes, Henley's collaboration
with anthropologist Anne Rowbottom took, as it were, the subjects'
point of view as its rallying cry. Near the end of Faces
in the Crowd, one of the English fans of the Queen mother
declared, 'We lost our colonies, we lost our passports; without
the royal family, we'd be just an island with a bunch of people
on it,' a comment that provoked much mirth in the audience,
but demanded additional analysis. The question of who speaks
in a documentary has intrigued scholars for decades; those interested
in this debate should see Jay Ruby's 'Speaking for, speaking
about, speaking with, or speaking alongside: an anthropological
and documentary dilemma,' in the fall 1991 issue of Visual
Anthropology Review.
The emphasis on the
native's point of view reached its logical conclusion with the
indigenous media movement, an effort to put cameras and recorders
in the hands of the subjects themselves. Few of these productions
were shown at Göttingen, although a symposium at the 1993
Mead Festival examined this fascinating work. Following in the
tracks of Sol Worth and John Adair's Through Navajo Eyes,
regrettably without their theoretical rigor, community activists
have promoted films and videos made by the natives themselves.
Curt Madison's Hitting Sticks-Healing Hearts (1992),
an exploration of a traditional potlatch produced at the request
and with the collaboration of village elders in Minto, Alaska,
came the closest to this emerging tendency. This fifty-eight
minute documentary, well-received by the audience in Germany,
was conceived as a warning to the next generation, to preserve
indigenous tradition and culture. Madison has lived in this
community for over twenty years and his video took an explicit
stance against cultural change.
On the other hand,
Jean Rouch and Philo Bergstein's remarkable Madame L'Eau
simultaneously celebrated, parodied, and criticized cultural
exchange between Africa and Europe. Rouch's longtime African
collaborators, Lam, Illo, and Damouré--best known for
their adventures in Jaguar (1954/1967) and Petit à
petit (1970)--hit the road again to visit the Netherlands
to study windmills, possible low-tech aids to relieve the drought
in Niger. Rouch referred to this improvised fiction film as
the result of a dream, a surrealist juxtaposition of incongruent
images, though it fell short of his earlier works. Even more
fascinating was Rouch's Gang (1993), directed by Steef
Meyknecht, Dirk Nijland, and Joost Verhey, a behind-the-scenes
look at the making of Madame L'Eau, which joined a long
line of documentaries, such as Les Blank's Burden of Dreams
(1982) about the making of Werner Herzog's Fitzcarraldo
(1982), which were better than the fiction films they examined.
The collaborative nature of Rouch's endeavor, the difficult
practice of structured improvisation, and the good humor of
his 'shared anthropology' were well underlined.
Promising new ethnographic
films from Asia generated significant comment. Hu Tai-Li's Voices
of Orchid Island (1993), which juxtaposed three related
stories of how the Yami people cope with pressures from mainland
Taiwan, opened with a direct challenge to ethnographic film
from one of the subjects, 'We tend to feel that the more anthropologists
come here, the deeper the harm they do to the Yami'. The rest
of this provocative 16mm feature film explored how the island
inhabitants struggle with tourist photography, medical care,
and nuclear waste disposal.
Puji and His Lovers
(1993), a feature documentary by Fan Zhiping, Hao Yuejun, and
Deng Qiyao, was the great discovery of the festival, undoubtedly
a revolutionary work in the context of Chinese ethnographic
film. The video traced the sometimes comical, always intrusive,
attempts of the anthropologists to understand and document the
sexual practices of the Yiche, an ethnic minority in a secluded
mountainous region of China, a group that encourages pre-marital
and extra-marital sex for men and women. As the title implied,
the production focused on one young man whose experiences offered
a 'typical biography'. Although marred by a terribly awkward
English-language commentary, spoken by a rank amateur, the documentary
amused and offended, provoking excellent debate about the process
of ethnographic research. The voice-over of Puji and His
Lovers was so consistently bad that it gradually became
inoffensive, bordering on a parody of didactic, scientific,
commentary. As the crew struggled to record this difficult,
18
and elusive,
activity, the anthropologist/narrator commented on a scene of
coitus interruptus, 'It's a pity our timing was not good'.
Refreshingly, the
anthropologists and crew members were characters in the story,
even being invoked as possible sexual partners. Of an attractive,
but short, crew member, one woman informant stated, 'The sun
can make a long shadow so long as it does not set'. Most films
at the festival, like most written ethnographies, masked the
rapport between anthropologists and subjects. Although this
approach hardly represented a sophisticated, critical reflexivity,
Puji and His Lovers, through sheer honesty, raised issues
of field rapport and ethics that most of the other films avoided.
The discussion afterwards, despite the difficulty of translating
from English to Chinese and back again, was the most engaging
of the festival. Viewers were particularly disturbed by the
apparent invasion of privacy, unavoidable in the study of human
sexuality, and by the depiction of women, since the principal
crew members and anthropologists were men. Viewers were not
assuaged by the videographer's comment that he had 'many girlfriends'
in the village, even though Yuejun spoke the local language
and the work was based on his ten years of fieldwork in the
community.
From this point of
view, audience members seemed much more in tune with the sensitive
Our Way of Loving (1994), by Joanna Head and Jean Lydall,
the third BBC television film about Hamar women in Ethiopia,
following The Women Who Smile (1990) and Two Girls
Go Hunting (1991). Based on twenty-five years of fieldwork
in Ethiopia, the film demonstrated a practiced relativism as
it focused on women's experiences. It detailed a coming of age
ceremony in which men whipped their women relatives, while one
character acknowledged that 'Beating is our way of loving,'
a comment that provoked surprisingly little discussion afterwards.
Another BBC production, War: We Are All Neighbors (1993),
Debbie Christie and Tone Bringa's study of the breakdown of
community among Muslims and Croats in a small village in Bosnia,
may have been the most dramatic work shown in Göttingen.
Tightly structured and brilliantly shot by Doug Hallows for
the Disappearing World series, the film clearly demonstrated
the corrosive effects of nationalism and ethnocentrism. Ironically,
the selection committee evaluation singled out the voice-over
narration as 'often redundant,' at a festival where most films
needed some voice-over but had none and the rest had poorly
written and spoken commentaries. A moving and disturbing documentary,
War: We Are All Neighbors returned to the town eight
weeks after the initial filming to find that all the Muslim
houses had been destroyed and the people killed or displaced
by their fellow villagers.
Experimental Techniques
An outsider's perspective,
and a critical one, was only acceptable, indeed demanded, in
works that dealt with European culture, such as Thomas Imbach's
Well Done (1994), an impressionistic study of a Swiss
bank and its employees. The politically correct double standard
was operative; criticize your own culture, treat other cultures
with utmost respect. This montage of life inside, and sometimes
outside, a major corporation used highly experimental techniques--time
lapse, jump cuts, and rapid intercutting of unrelated shots.
The unit of meaning in Well Done was not the sequence
shot, but the montage sequence, the flurry of autonomous images,
made meaningful through editing. Well Done emphasized
the extent of institutional control, the elaborate grading of
performance, and the profound hierarchy of the corporation.
Imbach contended that the mercenary capitalist values of the
bank, a depressingly anti-democratic environment, reached into
the workers' personal lives. Dominance and accommodation were
the order of the day. Shot on Hi-8mm video, but distributed
on 35mm film, this polished documentary entertained the audience
and received praise from the partisans of experimental efforts,
while perhaps unfortunately reinforcing negative stereotypes
of Swiss national character.
There were a handful
of aesthetically daring documentaries at the Göttingen
festival. Audience members, however, displayed a general suspicion
of so-called experimental techniques--slow motion, posterization,
canned music, black-and-white sequences crosscut with color
sequences, etc.--preferring the conventions of plain documentary
style. This may explain why the Jury of the Student Film Competition--Judith
MacDougall, Asen Balikci, and Lisl Waltner--chose Costa's unpretentious
Back to the Homeland. Lutz, another graduate of Manchester
University, acknowledged the influence of MTV and his use of
strobe, slow motion, colorization, and non-diegetic music contributed
organically to the themes of displacement and exile in Out
of Place. MacLeod's Bash Street used experimental
techniques to 'question the nature of representation,' in the
words of her advisor, Paul Henley, who opposed these stylistic
choices. Like anthropologist Peter Loizos, David MacDougall,
in both his film and his interventions during discussions, was
an articulate advocate of the transparent documentary style,
arguing against 'special effects'. Anthropologist and filmmaker
Ivo Strecker coyly pointed out that MacDougall's glowing lighting,
lush color, and elegant camerawork provided a special effect
all of its own.
One selection committee
member noted that Gary Kildea's Valencia Diary (1992)
'has puzzled many a viewer with its oscillation between scenes
in black-and-white and scenes in colour,' implying that this
practice lacked structure or pattern. Kildea alternated black-and-white
scenes, primarily interviews and interactive sequences shot
on 8mm video, with lush 16mm color landscapes and establishing
shots. In addition, Kildea inserted intertitles in an diary-like
style detailing the passage of time before the Philippine election
between Marcos and Aquino. This first-person travelogue documentary
questioned the surface objectivity of traditional reportage;
the journal style became current for American documentarists
in the late 1970s when Ed Pincus completed Diaries, 1971-76
(1978/1981). Valencia Diary seemed a bit dated in its
coverage of the election despite the brilliant intimacy of the
style, which captured, among other things, a Catholic priest
urging parishioners not to sell their votes. Kildea's presence
at the festival was missed, partly because he could have presented
a vocal alternative to the straightforward documentary style
that predominated. While some of the critics of experimentation
remained attached to pre-modernist narrative styles, others
may have reacted to the clumsy use of such devices, rather than
to the techniques per se.
Although visual anthropology
remains in its infancy, the Göttingen International Ethnographic
Film Festival has contributed mightily to its development. With
efforts like Valencia Diary, Our Way of Loving,
and the controversial Puji and His Lovers, the field
will become a respected, and innovative, dimension of anthropological
inquiry. The Institut für den Wissenschaftlichen Film and
the organizers--Rolf Husmann, Werner Sperschneider, Beate Engelbrecht,
Ulrich Roters--deserve praise for an exciting and well-run festival.
Unquestionably, Göttingen will provide definition to the
development of an anthropological cinema in the coming years.
Anyone committed to ethnographic film should plan to attend
the 1996 festival; like the immigrants in Back to the Homeland,
who return year after year to their mountain village in Portugal,
I'll be back.
|