Collaborative Filmmaking: An Open Space for Making Meaning, A Moral Ground for Ethnographic Film
Collaborative Filmmaking: An Open Space for Making Meaning, A Moral Ground for Ethnographic Film
复制标题
合作电影制作：创造意义的开放空间，民族志电影的道德基础
DOI：
10.1525/var.1995.11.2.94
复制
发表时间：
1995
影响因子：
0.8
通讯作者：
Sarah Elder
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Sarah Elder
我将在这里讨论图像制作者和媒体主体之间的合作空间，我相信好的纪录片制作发生的空间。所有的纪录片都是作为纪录片制作者和拍摄对象之间关系的记录而存在的。当我在这里谈到合作时，我指的是这种关系的基础。我不是在讨论合作电影制作人之间的传统合作，比如大卫和朱迪思·麦克杜格尔或蒂姆·阿希、帕齐·阿希和琳达康纳之间的合作，我也不是在谈论媒体，通常是土著媒体，在那里，合作主体是完整的制作人。我说的是最常见的纪录片形式，其中制作者和主题是不同的-不同的文化背景或性别，社会权力，经济，语言，电影制作知识，等等，很少考虑不同的控制水平，长期以来，合作一词一直是一个政治上可接受的总括性描述大多数共同努力。在纪录片中，这个词被抛来抛去，意思是从作为线人的主题到分享不同技能的主题，再到将船员介绍给社区的主题，再到作为联合制片人的主题。我提议的这种横向合作创造了一个开放的对话空间：一个让电影制作者学会提出他们最初不知道要问的问题的空间，一个电影主体选择他们认为重要的现实片段来记录的地方，一个主体和图像制作者可以调解自己的代表的道德场所。我将简要描述我的同事伦纳德卡默林和我在阿拉斯加土著遗产电影中心（ANHFC），阿拉斯加大学，与因纽特人和Yup'ik爱斯基摩人社区合作，在过去的二十三年里开发的社区合作电影制作。我也相信它很好地服务了土著社区，创造了他们珍视和珍惜的电影文献。我们首先向村民和部落领袖介绍我们的方法、我们以前的工作和我们的目标。如果他们正式批准我们和他们一起拍电影，我们就搬到村里住两到四个月。每个人都可以在任何时候拒绝拍摄。社区成员选择谁和什么事件将被拍摄，并决定什么不会被拍摄，他们作出所有的翻译和审查编辑版本的电影。我们通常使用双盲或三盲翻译过程来确保准确性。卡梅林和我担任联合导演、摄影师、录音师和编辑。我们声称是作者。我们做出了美学、技术、上下文和结构上的选择，我们认为这些选择使电影更容易被西方民族志和纪录片观众所接受--限制了播放时间（20-90分钟），英文字幕，识别环境，说明身份我们也非常有意识地调解为村观众编辑-包括所有氏族，已故长者的形象，特别的笑话，我们遵循一种真实/直接的电影风格，使用西方的叙事戏剧手段，如节奏，形式主义的组成和椭圆编辑。我们试图保持采访，故事和动作序列的时间完整性，我们向居民展示编辑过的场景，以确保我们没有为了压缩时间的要求而牺牲重要元素或风格基调。材料的版本
I will discuss here the collaborative space between image maker and media subject, the space where I believe good documentary filmmaking happens. All documentary exists as a record of the relationship between filmmaker and subject. When I speak about collaboration here, I speak about the ground of that relationship. I am not discussing traditional collaboration between co-filmmakers, as between David and Judith MacDougall or Tim Asch, Patsy Asch and Linda Connor, nor am I speaking about media, often indigenous media, where co-subjects are the full makers. I am speaking about the most common form of documentary where maker and subject are different—different in cultural background or gender, social power, economics, language, filmmaking knowledge, etc. With little regard for differing levels of control, the term collaboration has long served as a politically acceptable catch-all description of most joint efforts. In documentary the term is tossed around to mean anything from the subject as informant to the sharing of differing skills to the subject introducing the crew into a community to the subject as co-producer. The type of lateral collaboration I'm proposing creates an open space for dialogue: a space for filmmakers to learn to pose the questions they do not originally know to ask, a place where film subjects select the fragments of their reality they deem significant to document, and a moral place where subjects and image makers can mediate their own representation. I will briefly describe the community collaborative filmmaking that my colleague Leonard Kamerling and I developed over the past twenty-three years at the Alaska Native Heritage Film Center (ANHFC), University of Alaska, working with Inupiaq and Yup'ik Eskimo communities Our collaborative approach has served us well as ethnographic filmmakers, and I also believe it has served the indigenous communities well in creating film documents they value and cherishWe first present our methods, our previous work and our goals to village residents and tribal leaders. If they grant us formal permission to make a film with them, we move into the village for two to four months. Every individual can refuse to be filmed at any time. Community members select who and what events will be filmed, and decide what will not be filmedThey make all translations and review edited versions of the films. Often we use a double or triple blind translation process to insure accuracy. Kamerling and I serve as co-directors, photographer, sound recordist and editor. We do claim authorship. We make aesthetic, technical, contextual and structural choices which we feel make the film accessible to western ethnographic and documentary audiences—limiting the running time (20-90 minutes), subtitling in English, identifying the environment, explicating identitiesWe also very consciously mediate the editing for the village audience—including all clans, images of deceased elders, special jokes, etc. We follow a verite/direct cinema style using western narrative dramatic devices such as pacing, formalist composition and elliptical editingWe try to maintain the temporal integrity of interviews, stories, and action sequences, and we show edited scenes to residents to make sure we haven't sacrificed vital elements or stylistic tonalities to the demands of compressing timeMost residents prefer longer versions of the material