Tukana vs. Bali

Technique vs. Technique

There is a difficult line drawn in examining what is considered "ethnographic" film and what, on the other hand, can be considered a documentary. In order for it to be geared towards an "ethnography" it seems that the natives voice should be able to come through in a much more direct way. There are times however, where it is hard to put ethnography and documentary films in such black and white terms. This past week in class we examined two very different but very informative "ethnographic films". They both offered information and insight into different cultures by very different techniques. The two movies we examined were Margaret Mead's Trance and Dance in Bali and the MacDougal's piece on the Tukana Tribe, Tukana Conversations 2. It's important to note that these two films were shot in two very different time periods. Margret Mead's piece was shot in 1952 while the McDougall's piece was shot between the years of 1973 and 1974. With this being said its important to note the different approach and techniques the film- makers used.

In Jame's Clifford's piece "On Ethnographic Authority" he speaks on the delicate ways in which an "ethnographic" filmmaker should go about in their approach to ethnographic filming. He writes out a guideline in basic concepts that an ethnographic film should follow. Clifford explains that when going to look and study a culture for an ethnographic film, there should be "an increased emphasis on the power of observation." He means to look at a culture simply through observing and watching for their behavior, gestures, and ceremonies. The ethnographers must be a trained onlooker, one who knows what to look for. Mead and McDgoual both are "trained" on-lookers, however their styles in doing so differ greatly.

Mead uses her own voice in Trance and Dance in Bali. She asserts her voice over footage she has filmed. Her footage is not fake, its of an actual performance by the people of Bali. its strictly Mead with a camera filming the performance. It is different because it is a direct idea of a ritual the people in Bali perform however with Mead's voice narrating. Clifford explains that Mead was an expert in describing her observation as a "trained onlooker" and how her own voice and her own interpretation of the performance was extraordinary and well beyond her time.

The McDougalls differ greatly in the sense that their film was almost the exact opposite of what Mead did. The McDougllas as well were "trained" on- lookers however their approach to observing was a little different. Instead of only narrating over footage they gave the Native's their own voice in the film. They incorporated their observations much more directly into the film as if the viewer was observing with them. They asked the Natives questions. Here, with the McDougalls, you can sense not necessarily a mastery of the language but as Clifford puts, "a use" of the language. The McDougall talk directly to the Tukana Tribe and the Tukana Tribe answers directly to the camera.

You can see Clifford's guidelines to ethnographic authority in both Mead's piece and McDougall's piece. Both Mead and McDougal have a primary focus in studying their different cultures. They "focus thematically on particular institutions". Mead focuses on a particular ritual/performance that the Bali people do. She goes into great detail telling about the ritual and explaining what is going on. She uses a slice of the culture to represent the whole. As well the McDougalls focus on Turkana Marriage and the direct opinions and thoughts the Turkana people have on it. They focus on marriage as insight to the larger Turkana Culture.

Margert Mead's piece and the McDougall's piece differ greatly however both offer small pieces of information that allow you to begin to look and view a particular culture. Their approaches towards their film making were very different but both revealed interesting and truthful depictions of a culture unfamiliar to the rest of the world. These two pieces were insightful and telling.