How Bracher’s Theory Relates to Documentary Filmmaking
The
art of documentary filmmaking is a painstaking, deliberate attempt to tell a
story, teach a lesson, and create awareness about an issue. In my previous career
as a film and television producer, I had a drive and a passion to tell stories
rooted in social justice and equality. This drive rooted in my educational instruction
as a social worker and community advocate. Documentary films are different from
other pictures such as feature films and comedy shorts, in that their main goal
is to capture some facet of reality or aspect of the world we live in.
My
last documentary in 2010, “Still Here: A Journey to Triumph” told the story of
a group of youth who retraced the path of their ancestors from Africa to the US
to Nova Scotia. The film not only recounted the historical journey this group
took, but it revealed the personal experiences and tragedies of a generation.
In
section four of his book, Bracher talks about the diachronic integration of
identity. He states that this is essential in order to experience compassion
and guilt. He uses the example of how
literary works, such as plays and novels take a person on a trip through the
cause and effect of a given situation. Documentary films do the same, in that
they lead the viewer in the direction the filmmaker wants to take them. It
forces them to examine the aspects of the narrative the writer wants them to
ponder, and sometimes leas to more questions, hypothesis and actions.
Bracher
says that in order for a person to experience compassion, three things must
happen: 1) there must recognition that the other person is experiencing
suffering; 2) the other person is unable to alleviate the suffering, and 3) the
factors that brought on the suffering are not the other person’s fault. Yet,
many resist the notion that a person’s plight is not always their fault.
In
the film, the story begins with the historical context of how this group of
African Americans came to arrive on the shores of the southern states and the
horrific conditions they faced there. These stories are not new. But the propensity
is to shrug of these experiences as old news, and someone else’s problem.
Bracher talks about the American Dream - with its focus on personal values, prosperity
and the notion of freedom and opportunity - being just that; a dream. This ideology is a myth that continues to be
planted in the hearts and minds of hopeful Americans and others around the
world, who go to drastic lengths to make their way to America’s ‘land of
opportunity’.
Bracher
states that this ‘Great Lie’ biases us to believe that those who are not achieving
the ‘dream’ are not doing so because they have chosen not to, and that their
position is due to their own fault. To relate this back to the film, the idea
of the American Dream were it true, was not afforded to this group of African
Americans. To achieve the dream, one had to work hard (how could this group
work in meaningful jobs that they were excluded from them); they had to educate
themselves (how could this group educate themselves when at that time they were
not permitted to read, write or attend school); they had to establish footing
in the community (how could this group establish a firm foundation when simple amenities
such as public washrooms, buses and many establishments denied them access or
entry).
Yet,
even though this group was forcefully brought to America, forced into slavery,
and destined to live in poverty suffering and harsh conditions for generations
to come, the diachronic integration of identity was not evident during this
time, as compassion for their plight was not a common experience. Society did not
experience guilt for the human suffering that occurred in the lives of a whole
group of people, even though this group was not permitted to be what they
wanted to be. Instead, this group of African Americans were labeled as lazy,
uneducated and accused of spending too much time blaming others for their fate
instead of doing something about it. Bracher says seeing people as being at
fault for their own suffering makes sympathy further impossible.
Bracher
states that what is needed to alleviate this scenario of blaming is to develop
the capacity for greater diachronic integration, which can be done through
reading narratives. I would further, in relation to the film that it can be
done by also viewing narratives. This lessens the incidences of exclusions from
the past, and expands our ability to respond in a compassionate way. As I the
film, Bracher states that narratives dealing with issues of homelessness, poverty,
and I would add historically displaced groups are valuable areas for further development
of human compassion and guilt. These types of stories reinforce the notion that
societal factors and other macro level causes and influences remain beyond a
person or group of people’s control.
I must
quote Brahcer when he states that,
A
similar integration can be pursued through the
painstaking
deconstruction and reconstruction,
either
by literary texts or by critical analysis of
them,
of appraisals of responsibility regarding
victims
in all sorts of circumstances. Such an
operation
involves starting from a condition, such
as
poverty, for which the victims themselves are
widely
presumed to be responsible, and then tracing
the
causes of this condition step by step back to
the
point at which the victims’ responsibility
dissolves.
At that point, one’s appraisal of
responsibility
is reversed, dissolving hatred and
contempt
and replacing these emotions with
sympathy
and compassion.
This was the goal of
this documentary - to challenge peoples’ believes about minorities in Canada.
Although still in denial, Canada did have slavery. After it was abolished, the
treatment of Blacks did not vanish with it. Racism still very much exists in
Canadian society, as demonstrated in many aspects of Canadian society; the police
force (heavy weight champion boxer Kirk Johnson); the school system (The Frank
Bligh Report); the courts (Donald Marshall Jr. Inquiry); and the list goes on.
If society continues to identify
these injustices as ‘their fault’ they will continue to lack the compassion
necessary to effect real change. That includes changes in perception, attitude and
motivation. Bracher states that with thorough integration, those who are well
off, privileged and in power will be implicated in the suffering. This places
responsibility on all of us to examine the conditions that permit such
suffering to continue, and take steps to eliminate them.
Bracher asserts that
through literary education (and I add again through visual mediums, films,
images and pictures) students can incorporate guilt into their identity
registers. This, he says, rids the student of any motives to blame the victim,
or not feel compassion for them. As he stated, it eliminates the assertion of
statements that Caucasians make when they attempt to diffuse guilt away from
themselves. This includes statements pertaining to the fact they that did not
personally enslave anyone so they should not be made to sacrifice financially
or otherwise for the advantage of Black people, as Bracher articulates.
Whether they be
teachers, policy makers, administrators (as Bracher mentioned) or even
filmmakers, who teach through visual stories, educators can help students to identify
the unconscious guilt and own it. Many may see it as a threat to their
identity, but it is vital for eliminating the problem of victim blaming in our
society.
