More Than One Mode

Q:  Nichols writes, "The fact that there is more than one mode of documentary film strongly suggests that the representation of reality is not an objective, cut-and-dried affair. Although there may be only one historical world, and even if certain facts about it can be agreed upon as objectively true, the ways of seeing and representing that world, like the ways of interpreting it, vary considerably."

Based on this statement, blog about what exactly you think this means and how the 6 modes of documentary film factor into this idea.


A:  Well, what this means to me is going to be different then what in means to everyone else. We are all unique people and think of things in very different ways. Much like the way I can interpret this question differently than anyone else; a viewer or director can do the same with the meaning of documentary. With that being said there is also the consideration of what type of mode the documentary is filmed in. There are some modes that leave the meaning behind the film completely up to the viewer, and others that are a little more straight forward. A picture of a person looking out a window can inflict many different feelings upon a viewer, if no one is there to tell them what the person is doing or thinking. That can be changed when a narrator tells a story over the picture, than a specific meaning can be given in that situation.
      Documentaries are not only meant to make the viewer interpret things in their own way, but they are also here to inform and persuade. If you take for example any Expository documentaries, they are largely here to persuade the viewer to think a certain why about something. It may be to get the viewer to side with the director on a certain issue, or it may just be to inform the viewer or a view they may have never thought of before. Reflexive documentaries, on the other hand, tell a completely different story. They have the soul purpose of making the viewer question everything they see. The whole point of a Reflexive documentary is to contradict it's self and make the view question a validity of the whole film. If you ask me, this type can get very confusing.
      Other types of documentaries deal with letting the cameras just role, and catch everything that happens in front of them. Observational and Participatory documentaries are two very different styles, but have one thing in common, the directors keep the cameras rolling all the time. Even if the finish product does not contain that sense of continuity, the cameras were always capturing what was happening in real time. Nothing in these documentaries were found footage or reenactments. They where real time of things that really unfolded in front of that camera lens. 
      With so many different types of documentaries out there for a film maker to choose from it makes sense that documentaries are not just a "cut-and-dried affair." Film makers have a wide verity of ways to allow their viewers to interpret their films. This increases that creative expression that a filmmaker can bestow upon his audience. He can lead them along a certain path, deeply confuse and incise them, or leave it up to the viewer to decide what something may or may not mean. In any words, the possibilities are endless and ever changing for documentary film makers.