Anthropology Blog #2

Anthropology Blog #2

Representing a Culture in Anthropology

                There are many different aspects that go into the correct form of representing a culture.  One must think about how the people in study want to be represented and not allow the film to fall into visual imperialism.  The film must represent the entire culture, so the anthropologist must, like Tim Asch said, know the culture and shoot everything so that the film accurately represents them and does not coincide with anyone’s agenda.  There are many different forms of representation to consider.  One way is by the particular, which is how N!ai: Story of a K!ung Woman is filmed.  The film N!ai was very informative and shot very well.  People learn about the K!ung culture from comparing N!ai, who is not the average K!ung woman.  No matter what the film maker does, there is always going to be bias because the film maker is putting their point of view and what they want to show in to the movie. 

                People’s bias’ show through no matter what because there is so much footage to go through that there is a certain representation for other people to learn about.  A good example of this is the movie The Cannibal Tours the maker of the movie had an agenda and it is clear that he wants to make the white people seem ignorant and show how the indigenous people were exploited. Tim Asch makes good points in his article that the anthropologist must know their subjects and film whole events.  Nobody should be misrepresented and the people being filmed should be able to see the video afterwards to make sure they are being represented in the correct way.  Also, filming the people while they are watching it makes for a good scene to get reactions and is revealing.  Even in the parts of Chronique d’un Ete that we watched there was the directors’ opinion in it and the fact that the directors were in the film gets their point across even more. The personality of the film makers comes out in the film in what they choose to edit out and how they choose to present the information that they have found. Film makers have to be wary of what they choose to edit out because the audience, if they have not learned about the culture they are watching, will believe it as fact and gain prejudices

The problem with film is that if the audience believes that movie is truth and that the cultures will never change.  It is like the culture is stuck in time and can never leave, unless the culture is revisited and explored again by a different set of eyes like Nanook Revisited.  The film Nanook Revisited was an effective film since it showed how the native people reacted to the first film.  It gave a look into how things are done now compared to the first Nanook which was reenacted in parts.  It shows how the culture still keeps the traditions alive, but in a semi modern way.   

Anthropologists need to be aware of the fact that they can be ethnocentric in the way that they are going to present the film, but the film maker can be aware of how much of their point of view is in it.  Like Kuehnast suggests film makers have the power of Visual Imperialism.  Film makers can make people feel a certain way about a group of people and sway their decision if the message is conveyed correctly.  

There are many different situations to consider while making a film. One main problem in ethnographic films is to make sure the culture is represented correctly and to make sure that the film makers’ bias’ are not easily seen.  But that is impossible unless there is no narration and it is just a film that watches the people go about their business.