A post modern documentary (part 1)

Exercise 5 - asks us to read In, around and afterthoughts (on documentary photography) (1981) by Martha Rosler and make notes in our blog.

The article discusses the evolution of documentary and includes examples of good and dubious documentary practise. It also goes some way to justify/explain how and why views towards documentary have altered over time.

Whilst I do not disagree with anything in the article, I would suggest that views towards documentary have changed further in the thirty plus years since this article was written. In terms of notes in my blog, at this moment in time I have a series of questions:

Ø         What is the purpose of documentary literature/photography?

Ø         Is it even possible for an article or an image to portray events objectively?

Ø         Why is one story 'bought' by the public and another 'rejected?

Ø         How can we be sure something is genuine, rather than politically motivated?

Ø         Why is political motivation not a genuine reason to act?

Ø         If images are staged to 'represent' a situation, does that make the situation they are representing any less real?

Ø         Does the reason behind why the public react matter - guilt, sympathy, shame...

Ø         Does the end justify the means?

Ø         Do the needs of the many really out way the needs of the few?

Ø         How do we ensure context and social understanding?

Ø         How do we ensure that vulnerable people are not exploited?

Ø         How do we ensure that we do not become immune to the images we see?

Ø         How do we balance sensitivity and sensationalism?

Ø         What's the difference between real documentary and muckraking?