Bruzzi claims that narration is an indicator that you're documentary has failed, as the use of it ruins the documentary and the images shown. This is an opinion that has taken a lot of criticism as narration can and does in fact link all of the images together. It is a great tool to make all of the scenes, archive footage and shot to be coherent. As without them what are you left with, a bunch of clips that don't necessarily tell s anything.
One issue mentioned with narration is it can be seen to force the audience into one way of looking at the situation. However, this could allow the viewers to be more engaged as they have the choice to challenge what is being said. The narration also tend to be objective rather than subjective, so what they state are normally facts to contribute to the footage.
Finally in this reading the issue of representation of who is the narrator is explored. The norm of it tends to be a white, middle class, male who does the narration, the narration that is referred to the 'voice of god'. This of course has implications to society if who you believe the 'voice of god', the truth speaker in society is one demographic of people. This could contribute to social issues, to prevent this issue it is important to have diversity within this area. For example female narrators provide a breath of fresh air to the more common norms.
No comments:
Post a Comment