Liyarn Ngarn & Documentarys Creative Treatment of Actuality

Aziz Al Mannai
2014
0
Defining documentaries has been a debatable, and most usually, an indecisive issue
among film theorists. In his definition of the term documentary as the creative treatment of
actuality, British filmmaker John Grierson addresses his argument of the documentation of
reality, in which documentary film is subject to creative choices by the filmmaker. These
choices, through various representation strategies and contexts, are what make documentary
practice subjective (Cohen et al., 2011). Directed by Martin Mhando, the film Liyarn Ngarn
portrays the struggles of the Indigenous people of Australia through the eyes of English
actor, Pete Postlethwaite. It is another example of a documentary that creatively employs
narrative and cinematic codes, while also affecting its viewers perception and
interpretation, making it a more subjective rather than objective representation of its claims.
One main strategy that most documentarians utilize is the narrative, which is
dependent on a story. This story of cause and effect usually revolves around a set of
characters, locations and acts with a beginning, middle and an end. The presentation of such
a narrative can in turn be chronological to the subject matter or not, depending on the
filmmakers choice. With that, the presence of a narrator is dependent on the mode of
representation chosen for the documentary. Due to the fact that documentaries are based on
real events, the usage of footage as testimonials and the reenactment of certain unrecorded
incidents support the presentation (or re-presentation) in the film (Bernard, n.d.).
In Liyarn Ngarn, Postlethwaite covers stories of injustices to Aboriginals in Australia,
conducting interviews with family members of victims of racial prejudice crimes and with
politically active figures, such as Indigenous Australian Patrick Dodson. Accordingly, the
film deals with this account in a chronological chain of events that Pete goes through. That is,
he encounters former schoolmate Bill Johnson, and learns that Bills adopted Aboriginal son
was murdered in a gruesome racial prejudice situation. This raises an interest in him to
investigate more about similar cases and their impact on the Australian community. He is, in
turn, baffled by the lagging response from the Australian government and the shameful,
inhumane treatment to other Aboriginals. Postlethwaite considers the journey he has been
through, the lessons hes learnt, and acknowledges that it will continue in the same way he is
always drawn back to Australia (Mhando, 2007).
Theres also the Aboriginals story of struggle against the cruelty and mistreatment of
their government and the colonials. Through the interviews with Pat Dodson, we are handed
a chronology of events in the history of the reconciliation movement in which he was a major
contributor. First, a preview of former Prime Minister Paul Keatings Redfern Park
reconcilement speech indicates the beginnings of the Council for Reconciliation in 1992, in
which he recognizes and wishes to diminish the faults of the political system against the
Aboriginals. Next, footage of parliamentarian Pauline Hanson objecting to the special
treatment Aborigines are receiving from the government and also footage of previous Prime
Minister John Howards speech both demonstrate the intermittent legislative instability
against the Indigenous Australians. Towards the end of the film, shots of the 300,000 people
marching on the Sydney Harbor Bridge in 2000 in support of the reconcilement treaties
signify the success of the reconciliation act and the continuing hope for harmony between the
colonials and the Aborigines (Lawson, 2011; Mhando, 2007).
Truly, the approach in which the film not only captures a given reality of a country or
its people (the Aboriginals), but also the reality of an individual (Pete) is quite thematic
pertaining to the aspect of plot development. The development of such a plot depends on
characters and in this case, the most prominent ones were Roach, Dodson and obviously
Postlethwaite. Pat Dodson was shown through footage and interviews as the political
representative and leader of the Indigenous population. Pete Postlethwaite represents the
questing stranger who seeks to connect and make up amends for the things his ancestors (the
early English settlers of Australia) did to the Aborigines (Lawson, 2011). Archie Roachs
1
character is, on the other hand, the balance between western and Aboriginal beliefs, as stated
by his music producer, Shane Howard. That is, Roach was drawn out as the mediator or the
voice of the Aboriginals between the other two main characters. And this is evident through
his music, where he sings of the losses his people endured but also of the hope in carrying
on (Flanagan, 2007).
Documentaries have had a past of using actors, instead of real people, in reenacting
untaken footage (Ward, 2013). In contrast, non-actors and the characterized personalities
mentioned above are employed in Liyarn Ngarn for its moments of re-enactment.
Reenactment is an illustrative scheme through which a documentarys premise is relayed and
it can be carried out in various ways (Aufderheide, 2007). In the beginning of the film, Pete
takes us to Perths Majesty Theater where he first encounters Bill. He actually takes us into
the room in which Bill handed him a script and told him about Louis. Here, reenactment was
used as a substitute to unavailable footage of this encounter. Another example is in the
prison, where a young aboriginal singer called Robbie Walker was held. We first see both
Archie and Pete in the same cell where Walker attempted suicide and then we are taken
outside where a prison guard was recounting the horrifying acts that other officers did to
Walker. Similarly, the use of animation conveys images that are an artistic reenactment of
unrecorded events (Aufderheide, 2007). In a short animation sequence in Liyarn Ngarn, we
not only view a reenactment of sorts, but also a satire of both Pauline Johnson and John
Howard, where cut-outs of the two are dancing over the map of Australia and a cut-out of the
parliament building.
The documentarys employment of the expository mode of representation is also
another narrative tactic used. It is a classic technique in documentary filmmaking in which a
narrator relays a direct commentary through voice-over narration with the use of stock
pictures/videos (often called b-rolls in broadcasting) that support his or her point
(Aufderheide, 2007). A brief account of Louis life with images of him growing up; pictorials
of news scripts about Robbie Walker are scrolled over the prison in which he was detained; a
video of Michael Long, an aboriginal football player whose public confrontation of racism
was part of the various cultural changes related to the reconciliation movement; and the shots
of desert landscapes with what is declared as the native, known land of the first peoples of
Australia are all examples of commentaries hosted by Postlethwaite throughout the
documentary.
Cinematic conventions, another important creative input by documentary filmmakers,
also affect the authenticity of the subject matter. From editing techniques to cinematographic
manipulations, the selection and alteration of shots to create, or otherwise recreate, reality
follows the standard tradition of having such actions seem spontaneous and unfeigned.
Indeed, the nature and presence of the camera influences the audiences reaction to scenes
(Aufderheide, 2007).
Methods of editing in some documentaries, such as in Liyarn Ngarn, craft isolated
takes, organized in a sequence, for them to transition unnoticed by viewers (Aufderheide,
2007). For instance, before the audience ever sees Bill Johnson, Pete has already given a
brief description of their encounter and history. In the same way, when Patrick Dodson is
introduced as being involved in Aborigines politics and the reconciliation movement, footage
of him in a convention explaining the meaning of the words Liyarn Ngarn, that is the
coming together of the spirit, is displayed.
With editing and the continuity of film comes cinematography, which is basically the
photographing action, involving techniques of lighting and camera motion. The
cinematographer, in turn, has full creativity over the visual elements of a film. The vast
Australian landscapes depicted in the documentary at hand were often accompanied by
narration of the belongingness of the Aborigines to their homeland. Also, jerky camera
movements are often associated with documentary films, submitting audiences to the
2
immediacy of the issue (Aufderheide, 2007), such as those where Pete talks directly to the
camera while walking through locations. Moreover, the amount of time and the nature of
lighting given for any particular scene in a movie may emphasize on the importance of that
scene or the emotional effect expected from an audience. In documentaries, the aim is to
depict realness of an occurrence (Aufderheide, 2007). In Liyarn Ngarn, among the several
sequences that utilize lighting and amount of camera time for this aim, one certain scene
comes to mind. In detail, the horrendous crime was recounted from the moment Louis was
bashed and beaten by the two men till his death in the hospital. Archie narrates this while
Pete silently listens. They are both on the same spot where the murder took place. It is night.
The only source of light is the street lamps. There is gravity to this scene. This is because of
the extended amount of time and the minimal use of lighting.
The need for an organized structure in documentary film is justified by the use of
aesthetic conventions, such as narrative and stylistic application, that one way or another
affects the authenticity of a subject matter. These conventions, more often than not, disguise
the presentation of actuality, making the facts in the documentary film seem unavoidable -
like fated reality (Aufderheide, 2007). This is why most documentary films come as
subjective mediums of presenting reality compared to other non-fiction films such as news
programs or educational videos. They tend to use techniques associated with fictional
storytelling. However, this key difference does not render the documentary genre invalid, but
is important to its typology in cinema. Stella Bruzzi, professor and head chair of the media
arts program in the University of Warwick, states that documentary filmmaking is a
perpetual negotiation between the real event and its representation the two remain
distinct but interactive (as cited in Ward, 2013).
Eitzen (1995) discusses several theologians reinterpretation of the term
documentary in comparison to works of fiction. In relation to previous definitions,
including that of John Grierson, documentaries are an imaginative representation of a reality
that is historical in that events referred to in any given documentary actually happened.
This reality, or world, that is illustrated is based on a state of affairs, such as things, peoples,
a chain of events and a sequence of cause and effect, that are put forth by documentarians to
make an assertive stance, claim or argument based on truthful occurrences unlike in fiction
where all these state of affairs are presented or/and argued, but are mere analogies or
resemblances of reality. Yet, Eitzens (1995) main point is not only to re-introduce the
concept of the documentary, but also to illustrate that the mode of reception or the way the
audience receives and consumes a documentary is what makes it an idiosyncratically
subjective practice to put forward beliefs or assertions.
He reasons that what makes people believe a certain film is a documentary is not only
the aesthetic conventions used within the film, but also the extrinsic factors, such as labels
and textual features that affect the viewers perception of the film. In other words,
documentaries are publicized and indexed as documentaries from the industrial or media
arenas. People are, then, informed beforehand that they are viewing a documentary. In
addition to these extrinsic factors, adding melodramatic or sentimental aspects diverts
viewers attention from the actual truth claims that the documentary is making and directs it
to the viewers personal identification and response (Eitzen, 1995). Simply put in the words
of Eitzen (1995) himself People do not always appear to interpret documentaries as
"arguments, but as mediums to relate to and focus on assumedly true characters through
emotional resonance rather than logical interpretation of claims and arguments. This is
further indicative of the subjectivity of documentary film. In Liyarn Ngarn, there are many
applications of such preference to dramatization, namely, those stories of Aborigines as
victims of racial crimes.
Narrative constructivism, stylistic choices and also the audiences reception of
documentary films account for the creative aspects of its practice, and in turn, its subjective
3
nature. However, these aesthetic conventions employed by documentarians are what identify
this type of non-fiction filmmaking from others as both an imaginative form of representation
and a view of reality that go hand in hand and are different from methods of fictional
filmmaking.
References
Aufderheide, P. (2007). Defining the documentary. In Documentary film: a very short
introduction (pp. 1-44). New York, United States of America: Oxford University
Press.
Bernard, S. C. (n.d.). Documentary storytelling: the drama of real life.
Retrieved from
http://www.writersstore.com/documentary-storytelling-the-drama-of-real-life/
Cohen, H., Salazar, J.F., Barkat, I. (2011). The documentary screen. In Screen media arts: an
introduction to concepts & practices (pp. 281-321). Melbourne, Australia: Oxford
University Press.
Eitzen, D. (1995). When is a documentary?: documentary as a mode of reception. Cinema
Journal, 81-102. Retrieved from
http://0-www.jstor.org.prospero.murdoch.edu.au/stable/10.2307/1225809?origin=api
Flanagan, M. (2007). Too Long Apart. Aboriginal and Islander Health Worker
Journal, 31(5), 6. Retrieved from
http://0search.informit.com.au.prospero.murdoch.edu.au/documentSummary;dn=956
336656574619;res=IELIND
Lawson, S. (2011, Febraury). Petes legacy. Inside Story. Retrieved from
http://inside.org.au/pete%E2%80%99s-legacy/
Mhando, M. (Director). (2007). Liyarn Ngarn [Documentary]. Australia: Australians for
Native Title and Reconciliation (ANTAR)
Ward, P. (2013). Fiction and nonfiction: the great divide. In Documentary: the margins of
reality (short cuts) (pp. 31-48) (Vol. 29). New York, United States of
America:Columbia University Press.
4