Film Matters: Please tell us about your article that is being published in Film Matters.
George Turner: This article explores, from various angles, the ethical questions concerning the representation of judicial systems in three documentary films. More specifically, I examine three documentaries’ publicizing of private matters, and the dilemmas that arise as a result. Andrew Jarecki’s Capturing the Friedmans (2003), Kim Longinotto’s Sisters in Law (2005) and Frederick Wiseman’s Titicut Follies (1967), inter alia, all document judicial processes to some degree and can accordingly be said to be publicizing private affairs. The article, upon analyzing each film’s representation of these affairs with regard to certain psychological phenomena, concludes that the dubious nature of legality in nonfiction film is too seldom acknowledged and is thus too often tactlessly represented. Ultimately, I argue for a revision of the discourses surrounding documentary, contending that an apolitical discourse on the medium’s ability to elicit social change can promise a more productive appreciation of its aesthetic and sociopolitical potential.
FM: What research and/or methodologies do you incorporate in your article?
GT: My work is interdisciplinary in its approach. It employs multiple theoretical methodologies and reaps the benefits from what each discipline affords the others. This is most prominently evident in my application of a cognitive approach which, broadly speaking, examines the filmic medium with regard to the relevant cognitive behaviors in spectators. For instance, I analyze the representation of two interviews seen in Jarecki’s Capturing the Friedmans. Here, differences in framing, lighting, and other components of mise-en-scene can be seen to contort spectators’ emotional mimicry of the filmic subjects. This has some serious implications concerning the ethics of a spectator’s understanding of these interviewees being directly influenced by the filmmaker’s aesthetic choices. Such an argument builds upon recent studies on the cognition of nonfiction spectators. Though this may be only a brief representative example, the potential for an interdisciplinary cognitive approach to achieve a more holistic examination of documentary is clear. As my article thus shows, cognitive analyses of each film’s form and style and the corresponding cognitive spectator responses, in turn, cast light on the surrounding social, cultural, and political issues.
FM: Describe the original context for/when writing this article while an undergraduate student.
GT: This essay was written for a documentary cinema module in the second year of my Film BA course. The module was dedicated to the exploration of nonfiction film in relation to two specific topics: memory and judicial systems. The former topic considered how various modes of nonfiction film production (use of archives, interviews, exploration of geographical sites) can exhume memories of the past. The latter allowed for a more advanced and nuanced understanding of the relationship between these key modes of enquiry and their application to wider industrial, aesthetic, social, and cultural issues. My article, the larger of two assessments for the module, was situated here: an assessed piece attempting to sustain a discussion on how representations of events within judicial systems can impact wider debates.
FM: How has your department and/or institution supported your work in film and media?
GT: The School of Arts at Kent is a vibrant and exciting study environment. The opportunity for scholarly engagement beyond the course curriculum is particularly prominent. During my time as an undergraduate student, I regularly attended research events hosted by the Aesthetics Research Centre and the Film, Media and Culture Research Group. Both groups, despite typically attended only by postgraduate students and staff, were welcoming and encouraging as I slowly developed an interest in my academic field. The opportunity for direct 1-1 supervision has been equally vital to my undergraduate work, given the eagerness of each tutor to arrange to meet for academic advice. The school’s supportive and multidisciplinary ethos has undoubtedly influenced my own work and my enthusiasm for pursuing academia. Several members of staff have, through their direct tuition in this way, influenced my desire to pursue academia and push my ambitions whilst an undergraduate. Special recognition for this inspirational teaching should be noted for Dr. Dieter Declercq, my dissertation supervisors Dr. Margrethe Bruun Vaage and Prof. Murray Smith, and this essay’s module convenor Dr. Maurizio Cinquegrani (see below).
FM: How have your faculty mentors fostered your advancement as a film scholar?
GT: The module was run by Dr. Maurizio Cinquegrani and Dr. Zahra Tavassoli Zea. The exceptional standard of assiduous teaching delivered by both members of staff was crucial to my gradual familiarity with the complex topics discussed. This was particularly the case with some of the more advanced readings on the intricate indexicality between theoretical debates of visual representations and the potential political impact of the publication of these images. Since his teaching on a film histories module in my very first term, Dr. Cinquegrani, in particular, continues to be a supportive and inspiring figure during my time as a budding film scholar. His guidance with several endeavors both in my course curriculum and beyond (including the preparation of this article) has improved my confidence in academic writing, pushed me to pursue more ambitious goals within my work, and allowed me to better grasp the implications of following an academic career.
FM: How has the Film Matters editorial and publication process impacted the development/evolution of your article?
GT: This process has afforded me the opportunity to widen the scope of relevance that this article carries. By allowing me to increase the word count, the article has been supplemented in two ways. First, I have been able to expand on the issue of apolitical approaches in documentary theory. Undoubtedly, a book-length research project could be done on the political implications of judicial systems in cinema. Despite the section on this area in the article being modest in scale, a more thorough analysis is apparent than there was when I first submitted the essay for examination. Originally, this part of the essay was brief and Dr. Tavassoli Zea’s feedback noted the potential for expansion on the subject. The version published by Film Matters rewards the reader with a more developed and precise argument in favor of apolitical documentary theory, instead of the ambiguous and weak notion contended in the original essay.
Secondly, this article, compared to the original assessed piece, sees the “bigger picture.” Development of the essay has allowed for acknowledgement of the relevance that my concerns have in regular documentary consumption. Applying academic theory to everyday consumption is a vital step to prevent scholarship falling into an inaccessible and whimsical practice that struggles to benefit wider audiences. The published article avoids this trouble by recognizing the significance of the ethics of documentary in everyday viewing, particularly given the current popularity of documentaries on VOD services.
FM: What audience do you hope to reach with your Film Matters article and/or what impact do you hope it has on the field of film studies?
GT: As mentioned above, I hope that my article, by noting the widespread consumption of investigative documentaries, will find appeal in a wide readership. This would be in addition to readers with knowledge in film theory, cognition, and so on. By finding purpose and relevance beyond academic circles, scholarship has the potential to influence the ubiquitous practice of viewership, particularly when its findings are augmented with research from a variety of disciplines. Therefore, I would say I wish for my article’s impact to be twofold; first, I hope that the article may showcase the benefit of interdisciplinary practice in cognitive film theory and, in turn, may influence others to engage in this minority doctrine; secondly, I hope that the article will urge film scholars to continue recognizing the potential for their field to have an impact on viewer consumption, even if on a relatively small scale.
FM: What are your future plans?
GT: I am now completing an MSt in Film Aesthetics at the University of Oxford. After this, I would like to progress onto doctoral study and eventually pursue an academic career. In the meantime, I am exploring options to gain work experience in film marketing or development.
Author Biography
George Turner graduated from the University of Kent in 2020. He is now reading for an MSt in Film Aesthetics from the University of Oxford. His interests include analytic film philosophy, narratology, and silent cinema. George has also engaged with film practice; his most recent short film being officially selected by London International Moving Picture Awards and Dumbo Film Festival 2019.
