A Theoretical Understanding of ‘The

Art of Artistry’ Product - Documentary

A Post Modern assessment of Representation through

Documentary • Documentaries, like photography, must be considered a

representational medium. They signify the truth; yet the truth is not as innocent as it may seem.

• Documentaries portray a version of the truth, presented by the creator directly to the viewer. The viewer is drawn into a reality that seemingly does not need questioning, and the viewer experiences co presence in being in the now, looking at the image, yet also there, looking at what the image represents.

• The lens of the camera is in effect the eye of the viewer, and they are in effect there.

Applying this to The Art of Artistry

• We tried to allow our viewers to determine their own perception of creativity through ensuring that our viewers feel as though they are personally experiencing the events through the camera lens. The interviews give a very personal insight into the expert’s viewpoints, and we achieved this with particular success as we kept the shots simple (or organic), and the surroundings objects plain. Therefore, we attempted to avoid channeling the audience to our own perception, and instead aided them to create their own. By ‘simple’ this relates to our own preferred reading (Hall) and therefore we may still have influenced viewers.

• Despite this, it is an unavoidable fact that we presented our own version of the ‘truth’ and we hope that the audience can make the distinction between our perception of reality and reality. This will be explored further in question 3, determining audience feedback and reaction.

Theory cont.• Despite their presentation, documentaries

are not an objective but a subjective device, a medium that marshall[s] systems of representation to encourage a point of view about something.

• Bauldrillard argues that a documentary is a representation of what reality once was, and not what it is. Furthermore it is made in the eyes of the creator.

Studies in Documentary Film

Volume 4, Issue 1, 2010

Applying this• The subjectivity comes from who we chose to interview, and

therefore this represents our perceptions about what a creative job entails. However, we successfully interviewed a range of people who may not have a creative job, yet have an educated view about what creativity is. To contrast this, we also included two artists who do have a conventional creative involvement in their lifestyle. This is a success for us, however we could have made it clearer within the documentary that we wish to challenge audience perceptions of creative jobs.

• We did construct or medialise shots within our production. For example, when interviewing Paul Bennett we chose to represent him as relaxing in a vibrant cafe - this is totally constructed yet begins to shape and form audience impressions of him acting as a laid back and socially person when in reality they gain no knowledge of his true nature - they see the view we portray.

• However, whilst we may have shaped ideas of the audience we did make it clear that the documentary was a construct by breaking the 4th rule and showing a director (Sebastian Dewhirst) and camera equipment within the production. This is an example of our postmodern style.

Creativity Theory• Everyone has a differing opinion on creativity, and has a different

interpretation of what it means.

• David Gauntlett says ‘making is connecting’ i.e when you make products you are more likely to connect with other people as you want to share what you have made. Therefore, in relation to his appearance in the production and when taking a theoretical view of the production we must consider this more deeply. As filmmakers we are a living example of this - we made our video and then a viewers watched it we connected to them. Furthermore, it was the creativity of the interviewee’s that led to our contacting of them and proceeding interviews. If it were not for their own creativity we may not have connected with them.

• Jones says ‘a process needed for problem solving’ - our problem being our own struggle to grasp the true meaning of creativity itself. In order to solve this, we explored the question throughout our documentary.

Creat. Theory cont.

Abra interprets that creativity is ‘ the achieving of tangible products such as works of art’ - we actually contested this opinion with our production itself. Unless we burn a copy on a cd whereby it will become a tangible product, our production would not have been viewed as creative by Abra. Furthermore, within our production this is clear. Artists Paul Bennett and Judith Lawrence create tangible works of art that can be deemed as creative - but we would argue that Toby Mores is just as creative with his company ‘Sleepy Dogs’ who involve themselves in creative marketing techniques for media productions.

In conclusion… How did we do?

• In making our production we have connected with people, the viewers, and also we have been able to interact with them to gauge audience reception - this is a success.

• As Jones argues, our production did act as a process for problem solving – we wished to discover what creativity can mean and the differing ways in which it can be used. This is a success.

• Our product in itself is a creative piece of art, yet it cannot be touched or felt. Therefore, we have demonstrated that creativity can be viewed in different ways – we would certainly argue that our production has had a lot of creative and unique input! This is a point that we did prove, but we could have more implicitly shown within our production. which it can be used in life.