Author: valerie.schwarz

For my workpiece connected to my master’s thesis I want to create a short documentary dealing with the topic of sustainable travel by accompanying a travel group visiting Lapland. In previous blog posts I have outlined my plans and ideas for the project as well as some of the concerns and fears I had beforehand. Well, all of that planning is currently being tested in real life and while some of it turned out feasible and very valuable, other aspects and ideas proof to be a little less realistic.
I am currently in Lapland, more precisely in Jokkmokk where we spent the last two days on the Sami winter market. We started our journey five days ago in Linz and have spent two nights and countless hours on trains and busses since. In this blog entry I want to reflect on my impressions of the journey as well as the project so far and maybe see what I can improve for the next ten days.

What worked and what didn’t
I have already collected lots of footage for my documentary as well as for the travel agency as advertising material and every evening so far I have sat down to save everything to a hard drive and edit the photos I took that day. I am also planning to start creating a premiere pro project to already start sorting through video footage as well, however every single day so far has been so packed that I was only finished with editing my pictures at around one in the morning and after that I just wanted to sleep. But I am hoping that I will get around to it the next couple of days. Editing the photos daily really helps me stay motivated and focused, because I tend to take tons of photos and then just never edit them. It will feel amazing getting home from a trip and knowing that all of the photos are actually already done. So in a nutshell, keeping up to date with the photos works really well, keeping up to date with video footage works as far as securing data goes, but could be improved by sorting through footage already.

Another thing that has been working well enough so far is dealing with the extreme cold. We have had temperatures of below minus 11 degrees Celsius consistently over the last three days and my cameras still work without any trouble. Even the battery life doesn’t seem to suffer too drastically under the extreme temperatures. One thing that kind of scares me is taking the cameras from having been outside for a while to a warm, humid room indoors. From what I have researched beforehand, letting the camera warm up slowly inside of the bag is essential, as well as maybe putting it into a ziplock back to avoid condensation. I have been following these guidelines almost every time when entering a warm room from the outside and haven’t noticed any moisture building up or other issues so far. What is really annoying about this method is that I am practically unable to film anything inside of buildings because coming from the outside the cameras will always be really cold and when looking at an exhibition or watching a short concert, I will not have been inside for long enough to warm up the cameras gradually. So these were the situations where I had to risk it and take the camera out anyway in order to get any footage of the indoor events we visited. But I still avoided exposing the cameras to too much of a temperature shock.

I am also really happy with some of the footage I have so far as well as how our journey has been going so far. Enough problems have come up naturally to create an interesting story arc, but nothing too distracting from the main topic. There have also been a few really fitting quotes from people so far which would be amazing to help the story along, but unfortunately I was not able to record them in most cases. I did, however, write down the exact quote including who said it and when so that I might try to record audio of the people re-enacting their own quotes. We will see if that works but it might be a good solution to my problem. I have also started to carry around a small microphone with internal storage in situations where somebody might say something interesting, just so that I might be able to quickly record the audio. This has relieved me of some of the stress to always film because something useful might be said.

In general, finding a balance between being part of the journey and filming all the time has been kind of tricky but I am finding the right groove to be able to do both.

All in all I would say it is going pretty well with a few hiccups. I do believe that most of the project will be created in post-production anyway and I now just need to make sure that no footage I might need is missing.

As this semester drew to an end I (barely) survived one of the most stressful periods of my life; exhibition preparations. But in all seriousness, as if the final exhibition alone wouldn’t have been stressful enough on its own, I also conveniently decided to move to a whole different part of Austria, plan my master’s project in Lapland and pack for a holiday in Morocco at the same time. In hindsight I do realise that just because things would theoretically fit into my calendar one after the other, each one aligning perfectly, it does not mean that I should squeeze them like that. Each important life event needs some space for preparation, reflection and, most importantly, unexpected problems.

However, even with all of these things in the back of my mind, I still really enjoyed working towards the exhibition together as a team and I am really proud of what we have accomplished. In this blogpost I want to reflect on what worked really well and what didn’t, as well as what I enjoyed and what I just couldn’t wrap my head around.

My main task was being head of the construction and transportation team. This meant working together closely with the architecture team who planned everything that we needed to build later on. The real brains behind the whole operation were the members of the overall exhibition planning team. They did an incredible job of coordinating and organising everyone else. I also found it good to be in close contact with the other teams and being able to coordinate every step with the others. Unfortunately, I believe this is also where some of the issues arose, because a lot of the time, if a whole team was addressed via the group chat for example, 9 out of 10 people didn’t react and the one person that did was probably overworked already. So I believe, in projects like these there will always be people that need a bit more of a push to do their share of work instead of acting proactively.

This is also something where I realised one of my weaknesses lies; bossing people around. Because half of the time, I was being too nice and just asking if anyone could maybe help with some task and the other half of the time, I felt incredibly mean, telling people to do something because I let my annoyance get the better of me and dished it out to someone who isn’t at fault. Also I have noticed that my brain isn’t made for coordinating large groups, large amounts of projects or items, or anything of the sorts. The plans I told people concerning transportation kept changing because I talked to others about who all had a different opinion on things and let their opinions influence me and the decisions I had already made instead of sticking with them.

I think in the area of project management, I am just lacking the knowledge and confidence to stand in front of people and act like I know what I am doing. I constantly needed a second person to share my responsibilities with or share the burden of decision-making with.
I really hope that in future projects I will be able to take responsibility for my own actions without having to hide behind somebody else. Maybe once I have gained some more experience, or maybe I just have to fail once and take the full blame for it, in order to find out that it will most likely not be the end of the world, but instead just human.

As our semester neared its end, there were several different talks scheduled to help us get a clearer perspectives of our master’s thesis, future work perspectives and maybe life in general. And even though all of these topics tend to drive my pulse up, the talks were really helpful, reassuring and inspiring. So I want to reflect on the thoughts and ideas that came up during those last couple of days and how I might implement them into my plans.

First off, we had a talk with Hansjürgen Schmölzer, who was supposed to help us get an idea of what kind of career we might want to pursue after our Master’s and what possibilities we even have. While we only talked briefly about the kind of work I might want to do and my values and wishes, we quickly got into the topic of my master’s thesis, more specifically my practical workpiece. Now, I found out 5 minutes before our talk that Hansjürgen is an incredibly successful Austrian documentary filmmaker and, coincidentally, my practical workpiece IS a documentary. So, naturally he gave me lots of helpful tips, insights and hard truths once I had told him about my plans. I was able to get some feedback about some of the ideas I had and was still unsure about and he gave me some great creative input. However, he also kept me down to Earth and clearly told me if some of my visions were simply not feasible within the time limitations I have set for myself.

My second talk was with Roman, where we talked more about the topic of my thesis and I feel like every time I meet with him, my topic somehow changes a little but also becomes a lot clearer and I leave with newfound motivation to get started. (thank you Romaaaan!) We also talked about my workpiece and my plans for it, and while Hansjürgen Schmölzer seemed to think that 30 minutes were simply not enough time to establish the story in the way that I had planned, Roman was rather sceptical if I really wanted to make the film this long.

So in conclusion, getting feedback and help from people that know more than you and have more experience is incredibly helpful and eye-opening, but can also be rather confusing at times and lead to more of a mess to untangle at first. But I believe that it is worth it to take the time to sit down and go through all of the feedback you have received from different sources, also consider why people might think that way and then categorise it in a way that is helpful to you and your process. Also always stay true to your own opinions and values.

The last talk we had scheduled was with Ursula Lagger, where we talked more so about the written part of the thesis. In this talk I kind of surprised myself with how much I could already say about my topic and my plans and how much thought I have actually already put into it. With the exhibition and everything else that stressed me out lately, the thesis kind of slipped to the back of my mind where it stayed, lurking in the dark and whispering ominous warnings at times, but didn’t concern me enough to actually act on it. So, when it was finally time to face that sleeping dragon, I was pretty stressed, but it turns out that past me had actually already put some effort into taming it and maybe the distance even helped me see the bigger picture now.

So, sometimes we need a scheduled stressor to help us see that what we had been avoiding this whole time wasn’t as bad as we thought, anyway. However, the talk with Ursula Lagger was not only good for stressing me out, but it was also really helpful in clearing a lot of things up where my own thoughts and plans had been rather blurry so far.

To conclude, feedback talks really stress me out beforehand but always prove to be really helpful after the fact, so I am very glad that FH provides an environment where I am forced into them.

Für meinen Dokudreh Anfang Februar habe ich schon einiges an Ideen und Plänen gesammelt über die letzten Monate hinweg. Was ich jedoch noch nicht gemacht habe, ist mich für eine dieser Ideen zu entscheiden und sie detaillierter auszuführen. Diese Entscheidung habe ich inzwischen endlich getroffen (zumindest vorläufig). In diesem Blogpost will ich grob beschreiben, wie der Ablauf der Doku aussehen soll, in welche thematischen Abschnitte der Film aufgeteilt werden soll und wie sich diese von einander unterscheiden. Außerdem habe ich auch schon angefangen Shot-Ideen für einzelne Szenen zu sammeln und werde eine ausführlichere Liste in einem der nächsten Blog Beiträge erstellen.

In dieser Grafik habe ich versucht höchst professionell zu visualisieren, wie sich die Geschichte der Dokumentation über die unterschiedlichen Phasen hin entwickeln soll. Die einzelnen Phasen beschreibe ich im Folgenden genauer:

PHASE 1: Die Menschen
Stimmung: aufgeregt, euphorisch, hibbelig, aufgedreht, Vorfreude
Wir lernen zum ersten Mal unsere Reiseteilnehmer kennen, anfangs nur flüchtig über Aufnahmen beim Packen, kurze aufgeregte Blicke und eilige Schritte. Wir sehen wie die einzelnen Charaktere aufeinander treffen. Es herrscht überschwängliche Freude, aber man merkt auch, dass Nervosität und Aufregung in der Luft liegen. Niemand weiß so recht, was ihn erwartet.

PHASE 2: Die Anreise
Stimmung: Beruhigung, in sich kehren, es sich bequem machen, leiser, bedachter, vielleicht etwas mulmig
Die Gruppe wird ruhiger, kommt im Zug an und stellt sich auf die lange Fahrt ein. Es werden noch Zähne geputzt und Betten gemacht, das kann noch aufgedreht und leicht überfordert sein. Die anfängliche Überdrehtheit lässt nach, die Zweifel und Ängste bleiben vielleicht noch, aber man ist auch im ruhigen Reisemodus angekommen. Es werden vielleicht noch geflüsterte Gespräche geführt, vielleicht noch gelesen und aus dem Zugfenster geschaut. Dann nur noch Zuggeräusche, vorbeiziehende Lichter. Die Stimmung wird wieder aufgedrehter als nach dem Frühstück im Zug langsam der Endbahnhof näher kommt. Vielleicht werden noch Reisepläne besprochen, Vermutungen und Vorfreuden geäußert.

PHASE 3: Kritische Auseinandersetzung
Stimmung: hektisch, voll, überfüllt, hinterfragend, kritisch, reflektierend, erschöpft
Nach der Ruhe im Zug kommt die Gruppe in der Stadt an, der Bahnhof ist voll, der Weg zum Hotel wird nicht sofort gefunden, die Stimmung wird wieder gestresster. Reflexion und Zweifel werden nicht offen erklärt sondern über Gesprächsfetzen erfahrbar gemacht. Vielleicht gibt es Gespräche darüber, dass nachhaltig reisen Dinge auch komplizierter macht, vielleicht darüber dass es ein Privileg ist so reisen zu können. Man fragt sich, wo die Verbindung bleibt, wie man mit Locals in Kontakt kommen soll und warum man sich vielleicht fremd und unwillkommen fühlt.

PHASE 4: Wege finden
Stimmung: hoffnungsvoll aber vorsichtig, zaghaft, hinterfragend, kritisch, viel Diskurs und Dialog
Die Reise nach Lappland geht weiter, der Zug fungiert wieder als Ort für Pause und Reflexion. Vielleicht spricht man über das Erlebte, vielleicht über das was noch kommt. In Lappland angekommen gibt es direkten Kontakt mit Einheimischen, mit deren Lebensweise und Werten. Reisen fühlt sich richtig an, nachhaltig. Zwischen Sauna, Kartenspielen und Skitouren finden Gespräche statt die zusammenschweißen. Vielleicht gibt es Meinungsverschiedenheiten, vielleicht tauchen Probleme auf, aber in Summe ist die Gruppe eine Einheit. Durch das Ankommen bei sich selbst kann man sich auch für Neues öffnen und auf andere zugehen. Phase 4 lebt vom Austausch und vom gegenseitigen Respekt. Zuseher lernen gemeinsam mit den Reisenden. Man sieht was Nachhaltigkeit bedeutet.

PHASE 5: Zaghafter Optimismus
Stimmung: optimistisch, auch kritisch, Fazit ziehen, zufrieden, selbstsicher
Die Heimreise wird angetreten, man muss sich wieder von Lappland verabschieden. Die Hinreise wird gespiegelt, aber die Stimmung ist beruhigter, reflektierter und zufriedener. Die Reisenden haben etwas über das Land, seine Menschen und sich selbst gelernt. Man merkt wie die Reise nachwirkt in den Köpfen der Reisenden. Nicht nur Erinnerungen sondern vielleicht auch neue Freundschaften und neues Bewusstsein sind entstanden. Man erkennt eingespielte Dynamiken in der Gruppe. Man kann auch mal gemeinsam Schweigen und einfach nur sein.

ENDE

Im Allgemeinen soll dieser Film nicht erklären sondern zeigen. Er soll nicht belehrend sein sondern Zuseher mitnehmen und sie beobachten lassen wie es aussehen kann, wenn Nachhaltigkeit mit Überzeugung gelebt wird. Dass es nicht immer nur schön und leicht ist, sondern auch schwer sein kann und man manchmal vielleicht beginnt zu zweifeln. Dass man sich sehr wohl seiner privilegierten Lage bewusst sein muss und anderen immer mit Respekt und Wertschätzung gegenübertreten soll. Dass echte Verbindungen und prägende Erlebnisse dann entstehen können wenn man bereit ist sich zu öffnen und auf andere zuzugehen, auch wenn einem das vielleicht die eigenen Fehler und Unzulänglichkeiten vor Auge führt.

Allerdings ist mir auch bewusst, dass ich die Emotionen Anderer nicht planen kann und nicht entscheiden kann, welche Gespräche geführt werden und was passieren wird. Alles in Allem will ich versuchen, einen klaren roten Faden in meinem Kopf zu haben, der mir als Anhaltspunkt dafür dient, was ich einfangen will und welche Stimmungen ich audiovisuell darstellen will. Gleichzeitig will ich aber auch flexibel genug bleiben um Abweichungen von meiner Storyline nicht zu ignorieren sondern genauso festzuhalten und offen dafür zu bleiben, meine Pläne auch noch zu ändern.
Ich denke, am Wichtigsten wird es sein, immer bereit und aufmerksam zu sein und in den richtigen Momenten auf REC zu drücken.

One of the projects that gave me the biggest sense of accomplishment this semester was our short film shoot in December. Although it was also really stressful and exhausting at times, I loved how we all came together as a group and everyone gave their best and played their role to create an amazing product.

I found it incredibly interesting and inspiring to get somewhat of an insight into what it might look like on a real film set and working with a large team. All of the practical experience I have had so far outside of FH was with event after movies or smaller commercial productions where a team of maximum 3 people did everything from lighting, a little bit of scripting, camera and editing. However, with all of these shoots it was mostly just interviews or statements of company CEOs or employees talking about their work, so there wasn’t much creative freedom in it.
This is also why I enjoyed it so much to work with real actors and see a story come to life that we as a group developed further from an initial idea.

It also gave me a whole new appreciation for how much work goes into just a couple of minutes of professionally produced films or shows. How much time it takes to plan out every single shot, get the lighting just right, think of everything needed for the set design and so many more steps that need to be taken before even turning on a camera.
In comparison the work I usually do takes a lot less preparation and planning beforehand, but you also need to be a lot more flexible and spontaneous with filming because there are some situations which you cannot simply redo if the focus or camera movement were off.
I think having experienced both situations will greatly help me with my master’s project in order to combine thorough planning and thinking of storytelling with having to be spontaneous when things happen that cannot be planned for. During documentary filming, depending on the style of documentary, you might have to stay very vigilant not to miss shots that will help your planned story along or maybe even ask the right questions to the right people in order to achieve your goal for the movie.

One personal takeaway I got from the film shoot was that I am very bad at saying no, which often lands me in situations where I’m in over my head. That is also when I become frustrated and I’m always scared that I am very rude to others just because of my own exhaustion and stress. So in the future I want to be able to just clearly declare the tasks I want to do and have the capacity for without feeling bad for saying no to other tasks.

I still don’t know whether in the future I would rather be involved in more creative projects that are thoroughly planned and staged or whether I prefer capturing real moments with real people even if that means not being able to influence the captured story all that much.

I watched a documentary on the issue of rising senior populations in Finnish Lapland and how so-called “village helpers” can aid the elderly with daily tasks. The documentary talks about the Sami population in Lapland, what their traditions and ways of life are like, and how these helpers can ensure that the elderly citizens living by themselves in the northernmost regions of Lapland can stay in their homes and keep their traditions alive. Not only does the older population benefit greatly from this program, but they can also teach Sami traditions to the younger generations. The documentary talks about how the Sami traditionally lead rather secluded lives and prefer staying by themselves. This lifestyle, however, becomes harder to manage as Finland’s population, like in most European countries, keeps growing older. This is where these helpers come in and help out with tasks such as getting firewood, hunting or drying reindeer meat and skins.

The documentary talks about an indigenous people, but was made by a German team. This creates delicate ethical situation, where filmmakers must be very careful not to misrepresent or mistreat the filmed minority. Filming must happen in collaboration and with lots of transparency in order to accurately represent the culture and heritage. In this documentary, the film team followed some of the village helpers which were either not Sami or still had to learn some things about the traditions and culture. This way, the film was able to teach and learn in a respectful way and also depict what the process of sharing tradition can look like. This way, the point of view of the documentary is similar to the actual relation of the filmmakers to the topic.

The film treats the difficult topic of loneliness in old age and an aging population, while also showing a possible solution and an optimistic outlook. At the same time, it shows indigenous traditions and breathtaking landscapes of the north. Visually the documentary found a good balance of beautiful b-roll of the Scandinavian winter and meaningful moments between the elderly and the village helpers.

Although a story arc was created by following the training of the new village helpers, the tension of whether they had passed their theoretical exam or whether the senior lady would like them felt a bit too forced and unimportant to be the main problem or conflict of the film.

To conclude, I liked the effortless way of including multiple important topics into the documentary while also making sure to treat them in a respectful and transparent way. However, the dramaturgy of the film I found a bit lacking because it felt forced rather than just documented. By this I do not mean that they created uncomfortable situations for the participants but I do feel like the filmmakers tried to create more of a dramatic situation than there actually was in the editing process, making this part of the film feel a bit over exaggerated. This has made me realised that while a dramatic story arc is important to keep viewers watching, it cannot be artificially created but has to be authentic.

For this impulse blog entry I have watched the documentary “No country is an island” by Mark Bone on YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DBn_9b5zYE) about the Easter bombings in Sri Lanka in 2019 as well as two vlogs on the same YouTube channel about the technical background an some behind the scenes information.

The Documentary

The short documentary talks about an attack on Sri Lanka and follows along with one main character, who has founded an organisation helping victims of this attack. The video works with strong, impressive images which are a good mixture of picturesque drone shots of the country as well as very close shots of emotional scenes. Also the B-roll feels very intentional and like it was already filmed with the story in mind.
The main storyteller in the documentary is the aforementioned main character. His voice is used as the main narrator. There is also some overlayed information but no external narrator voice or other narration except for the interviews with members of the organisation as well as people affected by the attacks.
There are many shots in the video which are intentionally kept long and are allowed to breathe and unfold naturally giving the whole documentary a very natural and empathetic feeling.
There are also a couple of shots in the beginning as well as the end with two boy running through the streets and on the beach, which are never talked about or explained further, but just used as a tool for visual storytelling which ties the film together really well and is also reflected in the main character and his friend/colleague.

The insights from the vlogs

Vlog 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jl48x-ZzMfk
Vlog 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzVN2dV6yEQ

In the two accompanying vlogs, Bone mostly just takes the viewers along on the journey to Sri Lanka, unfortunately not showing too much of the filming process itself, but there are little insights here and there and some helpful tips he gives. He, for example, talked about how important it is to also take some control in documentary filmmaking, instead of just waiting for things to happen and come to you. He said filmmakers should be proactive and film something intentional every day and put themselves in situations where interesting footage will develop. Bone also talked about how important it is to review your footage daily while on location to make sure you have the right kinds of shots for the story you want to tell and so that you are actually able to see if everything will fit together the way you planned it. Bone also talked about letting shots breathe and giving the viewer time to adjust to certain scenes. His co-creator talked about how he found it helpful in documentary filmmaking to choose one narration style and commit to it in order to make the film more convincing.

Conclusion

I found the documentary captivating and moving, showing raw emotion, pain and suffering while also focusing on the good people are doing in order to help and thus not losing hope. I also found the fact fascinating that the documentary was filmed just 3 months after the attacks had happened. When documenting current topics like this one, it can be really important to act fast and there might not be a lot of time for pre-production in these cases.

Here is a very brief overview of the six different Modes of Documentary Film by Bill Nichols as described in his 2010 book: 

The Poetic Mode

This mode is more focused on conveying specific moods, feelings, and experiences to the viewers rather than just facts. The editing of poetic documentaries is very intentional and specific (Nichols, 2010, p. 162). Like in the expository mode, the poetic mode will often not focus the relationship between individuals and the filmmaker. Individuals are shown but viewers never really get to know them (Nichols, 2010, p. 156). 

The Expository Mode

In expository documentary films viewers are addressed directly in order to convey information to them. Sometimes filmmakers will use the Voice-Of-God, a stylistic choice where we cannot see the speaker but hear them throughout the film. This is the classical voice over used in many documentaries (Nichols, 2010, p. 167). In expository documentaries rhetoric methods are used to make points as clear as possible. These types of documentaries usually move within a framework that has existed beforehand. They add to the viewers’ knowledge pool, but they do not question or challenge existing structures (Nichols, 2010, p. 169).

The Observational Mode

While poetic and expository documentaries often collect raw material aiming to edit it into something aesthetically compelling or informative, fitting their exact ideas of the film, observational documentary filmmakers will often just see what happens in front of the camera without any intervention. Often there will also be no voice over or commentary in observational documentaries (Nichols, 2010, p. 172). This also allows for viewers to choose the focus instead of the filmmakers (Nichols, 2010, p. 174). With more authentic pacing of the films, the viewers also get to experience the actual timing more realistically (Nichols, 2010, p. 176).
The development of newer, lighter, more mobile equipment has helped observational documentaries flourish by guaranteeing the camera almost disappears (Nichols, 2010, p. 172). Individuals ideally tune out the cameras as much as possible, especially when being preoccupied with their own struggles. This authenticity and closeness to ones struggling can many times be uncomfortable to watch, feeling very intrusive. This has raised some ethical questions about this mode of documentaries as well (Nichols, 2010, p. 174). Also, the non-involvement of the filmmakers in this mode of documentaries can create some ethical dilemmas. Moreover, the omission of any form of commentary or clarification can lead to a problematic misrepresentation of certain situations or behaviors (Nichols, 2010, p. 175).

The Participatory Mode

In participatory documentaries the filmmaker does not just passively observe the subjects but actively interacts with them and influences the events. Conversations and interviews are an important part of these documentaries and the film becomes a reflection of the interactions between filmmaker and individuals (Nichols, 2010, p. 179). The filmmaker develops from some ominous, neutral presence into an actual human, interacting with others (Nichols, 2010, p. 182). Like in the observational mode and the performative mode, participatory documentaries feel like meeting the individuals. The influence filmmakers have on them, however, can raise some ethical questions (Nichols, 2010, p. 157).
With some participatory documentaries, the interaction does not stop with filmmaker and subject, but also the viewers can participate via interactive websites or art installations (Nichols, 2010, p. 180). However, participatory documentaries are not the first example to foster interaction with their audience. For example radio shows where hosts and callers interact, or anthropologists living among their research subjects also rely on the interaction between individuals (Nichols, 2010, p. 181).

The Reflexive Mode

Where the participatory mode provides exchange between filmmaker and subject, the reflexive mode focuses on the interaction of filmmakers and viewers. Reflexive documentaries do not just talk about history, facts or experiences, but about their representation within the film. The focus is shifted from the content to the film itself (Nichols, 2010, p. 194). 

The Performative Mode

Similar to the poetic mode, the performative mode of documentary filmmaking tries to convey emotions instead of facts. The focus is less on delivering information and more on creating emotional understanding (Nichols, 2010, p. 199). Performative documentaries are also often used by filmmakers to talk about their own personal experiences or those of communities they are a part of (Nichols, 2010, p. 205).

This was just a brief overview of the existing modes of documentaries; there is a more detailed table describing more specific qualities for each of the mentioned modes which I might include in the appendix. For analyzing and categorizing documentary films, this more extensive information will surely be useful, but I believe that for this part of my work the shortened down version of the description will suffice in giving an overview of the different modes.

This and the next blog post will be a deep dive into Bill Nichols’ Modes of Documentaries. In this first part I will give an overview into what these modes are, how they can be used to classify documentary films and how they developed over time. The two sources I used are both books written by Nichols, one published in 1991 and one in 2010. I also briefly talk about the changes made between the two books, but will occasionally combine informations found in both of the books as I deem them fitting for specific passages.

The In his book Representing Reality (1991), Bill Nichols first introduced what he called “Documentary Modes of Representation”: The Expository Mode, The Observational Mode, The Interactive Mode, and The Reflexive Mode (NICHOLS, 1991, p. 32). 
These initial four modes have since been amended with two more, Poetic and Performative, which are explained in depth in Nichols’ 2010 book Introduction to Documentary, Second Edition. Furthermore, Nichols changed the name of The Interactive Mode into The Participatory Mode, while the ideas stayed more or less the same (Nichols, 2010, pp. 149–153).
Additionally to the initial modes of documentaries, Nichols also talks about another way of categorizing documentary films: different models for documentary film, taken from other nonfictional types of media such as biographies, reports, or essays. In comparison, models for documentary film are a categorization lent from other types of media which are also nonfictional, while the modes of documentary film are categories which can also applied to other, also fictional, types of film, but not to other media. These two systems of classification, when used in combination provide a useful tool for analyzing documentary films (Nichols, 2010, p. 148). While Nichols also gives a brief overview of the different nonfictional models, as well as many different documentary example which he categorized according to model and mode, the main focus of the chapter in his book, as well as this part of this thesis will be on the six different modes of documentary film (Nichols, 2010, pp. 149–153).

In his 1991 book Nichols talks about the development of the different Documentary Modes of Representation. While he does state that some of the modes have predominant time periods as well as geographical areas, this does not mean that one followed after the other or that some are inherently better than others. All of the modes have existed next to each other and still do. Moreover, a film can usually not just be categorized as one mode, but is usually a mixture of two or more (NICHOLS, 1991, p. 33). Nonetheless, Nichols tries to give some insights into what might have motivated the emergence of each of the four initial modes. The expository mode of documentaries was developed as a reaction to fiction films, which were considered to be too distracting and too focused on entertainment instead of conveying information. The poetic mode was created with the desire in mind to talk about historical information while showing the world in a new and different way. With the emergence of newer, more mobile technologies in the 1960s, observational documentaries emerged. They were also a counter-reaction to the morales in expository documentaries. Once the observational documentaries felt too passive and limiting, interactive documentaries were created, establishing more interaction with the subject and enabling filmmakers to visualize past events through witness statements instead of reenactments. Finally, reflexive documentary films were driven by the desire to question the representation of the topics itself as well as conventions of documentaries (NICHOLS, 1991, pp. 32–33). Seemingly, new modes have always been developed when old ones were found to be lacking. However, Nichols suggests that this might just have been due to the world meant to be represented in documentaries had changed and thus also the modes of representation had to adapt and still do. Especially developments like technological advances have had tremendous effects on documentary films throughout history. Also now, the fact that almost every major event is being filmed by multiple phone cameras changes the available footage immensely (Nichols, 2010, p. 160). 

To conclude, while the different modes have developed out of some dissatisfaction with previous ones, each of these six modes is still being used in modern documentaries and has its application. With changing topics, filmmakers, subjects and frameworks, the ideal way to approach a documentary project will vary greatly and will most of the time require aspects and ideas from more than one of the different modes.

Right now the main thing that is holding me back is mainly just my inability to make decisions. I have a lot of different options and ideas about what direction my thesis could go in, but no certainty what I am going to do. I have been pivoting between many different decisions for months now, switching between feeling sure and very lost. So this blog post is my effort to finally cement one of the decisions I have made. The theory is that by putting it online for people to read, I will feel obliged to fulfil their expectations of my thesis. Objectively, this would never work because first of all, maybe about two people are ever going to read this far (thank you at this point) and second of all, no one will be so invested into my thesis topic as to actually form any huge expectations. But I am a notorious people-pleaser who is deadly afraid of letting people down, so for me this method will work just fine.
Full disclosure: for the following information on the thesis structure as well as the exact formulation of my research question, I have used ChatGPT to help me find something suitable.

The Topic

At my talk with Roman last week I presented him with the options I had narrowed it down to in my last blog post, with the sole goal in mind to walk out of that room with a decision for my topic. I’ll admit, that was a fairly ambitious plan, but although I didn’t have a fixed title, research question and structure ready by the end of our talk, it was really helpful in deciding what to explore further. I decided to somehow combine the notion of convincing people to travel more sustainably via a visual media, and the question of how documentary filmmakers’ audiovisual and ethical decisions on how to portray contrasting viewpoints can change the viewers’ perception.
I then explained my ideas and intentions to ChatGPT, asking him to come up with an appropriate research question. The following is the option that resonated most with me and that I felt like represented best what I want to do with my thesis.
“How can the design of a documentary—through audiovisual style, narrative structure, and ethical framing—be leveraged to fairly present conflicting viewpoints while effectively motivating audiences toward more sustainable travel behaviors?”

The Title

Well, this one is still a work in progress, but ChatGPT and I have come up with some options that I already like the sound of:

“Seeing Fairly: Ethical and Audiovisual Strategies for Persuasion in Sustainability Documentaries”“Representing Conflict Fairly: Ethical Documentary Design in the Context of Sustainable Travel Communication”
“Influencing Perception Ethically: Documentary Media Design for Sustainable Travel”
“…: Ethical Documentary Strategies for Fair and Persuasive Sustainable Travel Communication”

One idea I have had for a while now is for the title of my documentary project, which I would like to call Only Planet, as a reference to both the travel guide company Lonely Planet and to the fact that Earth is the only planet we have and we have to take better care of it. When I asked ChatGPT about its associations with the name though, it immediately jumped to a connection with Only Fans, so before I make a final decision on the name, I might test it out with real people in my life to see which association they would make first.

The Methods

For my research on documentaries and how different filmmakers approach the task of portraying contrasting viewpoints as well as treating the topic of sustainability, I want to both interview experts in the field, who can tell me first hand how they would deal with such issues. Furthermore, I would like to develop an informed framework for analysing different documentaries myself and categorising them within my thesis. For writing about the current state of research, I will rely heavily on scholarly literature on the topic.

The Structure

The following would be a rough outline of how the thesis might be structured to properly deal with the topic. While a lot of this will most likely still change throughout the course of the next few weeks, for now it is a good starting point to know what chapters I will definitely have to write, and to be able to prepare literature and also excerpts for my thesis. Once again, the structure was provided by ChatGPT after I had prompted him with the topic, research question, and methodology of my thesis. I then added some comments of my own for what I might want to write about in certain chapters.

---

1. Introduction

1.1 Background and significance
-> talking about sustainable travel as well as documentary filmmaking and viewer persuasion

1.2 Research problem

1.3 Research question + sub-questions

1.4 Methodological overview

1.5 Structure of the thesis

2. Theoretical & Conceptual Framework

2.1 Documentary Theory & Styles

-> talking about the theory behind documentary filmmaking, what types and styles there are, how to categorise

2.2 Media Design for Persuasion & Behaviour Change

-> talking about persuasion through media in general, empathy, sustainability persuasion specifically

2.3 Fairness, Credibility & Trust in Visual Media

-> the ethics behind it, how fairness is perceived

3. Methodology

3.1 Research Design

-> explanation and justification of used methodology, also how literature, research and practice tie together

3.2 Data Collection

-> describing criteria for which documentaries to analyse and which experts to talk to

3.3 Analytical Procedure

-> creating the framework for film analysis as well as the set of questions for expert interviews, also considering ethics and viability

4. Analysis & Findings

4.1 Content Analysis Results

-> how the documentaries analysed conflicting viewpoints, ethical considerations, common techniques

4.2 Expert Interview Findings

-> describing the expert’s answers, methodologies and approaches to documentary filmmaking, conflicts and ethics

4.3 Synthesis of Findings

-> see whether there are common themes in analysed films and amongst experts, see how different results might be combined

5. Practice-Based Component (max. 1/3 of thesis)

5.1 Project Description

5.2 Application of Findings

-> how theoretical findings can be applied to my own practical work / what I could have done better

5.3 Reflective Evaluation

6. Discussion

6.1 Interpretation of Results

6.2 Theoretical Implications

6.3 Practical Implications

6.4 Limitations

7. Conclusion