Bill Nichols and the Discourse of Sobriety
Do mockumentary films retain any trace of the ’discourse of sobriety’?
Throughout film history, documentary and fiction films have denoted the polar opposites of film form with each representing two distinct and separate traditions, the cinema of reality and the cinema of fiction (Doherty 16). However what was once a clear distinction has become blurred as the increasing popularity of mockumentary continues to weaken the assumed boundaries between fact and fiction (Sicinski). Prior to this ‘blurring of the lines’ the documentary genre enjoyed a privileged position amongst screen forms due its ‘the truth claim’ (Glick). Reflecting Bill Nichols’ observation that documentary employs the ‘discourse of sobriety’ (3), the truth claim is based upon the conception that documentary represents a more sophisticated screen form due to its exploration of real events and tendency to depict the world as it is (Nichols 3). Conversely, mockumentary films mix fact with fiction as the aesthetics of documentary, including hand-hand camera techniques, voice-over narration and interviews are manipulated to satirize cultural events, as well as to critique and deconstruct the principles of documentary form and technique (Davis). This has had a notable impact on film forms, as the aesthetics of documentary have begun to seep into the fabric of fiction filmmaking (Davis). Such an idea becomes particularly apparent when considering films such as Michael Winterbottom’s biopic 24 Hour Party People (2002) that challenge the traditional distinctions between fiction and reality by using the “stylistic tropes of the documentary toolbox” (Akoglu 23) to explore absurd and exaggerated stories within sober forms. In addition to illustrating how both fiction and mockumentary films continue to depart from Nichol’s notion of sobriety while still attempting to address ‘the real’, films such as 24 Hour Party People, Chris Lilley’s Angry Boys (2011), Remy Belvaux’s Man Bites Dog (1992) and Larry
Throughout film history, documentary and fiction films have denoted the polar opposites of film form with each representing two distinct and separate traditions, the cinema of reality and the cinema of fiction (Doherty 16). However what was once a clear distinction has become blurred as the increasing popularity of mockumentary continues to weaken the assumed boundaries between fact and fiction (Sicinski). Prior to this ‘blurring of the lines’ the documentary genre enjoyed a privileged position amongst screen forms due its ‘the truth claim’ (Glick). Reflecting Bill Nichols’ observation that documentary employs the ‘discourse of sobriety’ (3), the truth claim is based upon the conception that documentary represents a more sophisticated screen form due to its exploration of real events and tendency to depict the world as it is (Nichols 3). Conversely, mockumentary films mix fact with fiction as the aesthetics of documentary, including hand-hand camera techniques, voice-over narration and interviews are manipulated to satirize cultural events, as well as to critique and deconstruct the principles of documentary form and technique (Davis). This has had a notable impact on film forms, as the aesthetics of documentary have begun to seep into the fabric of fiction filmmaking (Davis). Such an idea becomes particularly apparent when considering films such as Michael Winterbottom’s biopic 24 Hour Party People (2002) that challenge the traditional distinctions between fiction and reality by using the “stylistic tropes of the documentary toolbox” (Akoglu 23) to explore absurd and exaggerated stories within sober forms. In addition to illustrating how both fiction and mockumentary films continue to depart from Nichol’s notion of sobriety while still attempting to address ‘the real’, films such as 24 Hour Party People, Chris Lilley’s Angry Boys (2011), Remy Belvaux’s Man Bites Dog (1992) and Larry
Cited: Angry Boys. Dir. Chris. Lilley. Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), 2011. DVD. Akoglu, Ozge Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan. Dir. Larry Charles. Everyman Pictures, 2006. DVD. Davis, Wendy Glick, Josh. “Documentary Appreciation Salon Wrap-Up and Reflections Mockumentary v. Documentary.” Docs in Progress. N.p., 2010. Web. 18 Oct. 2012. <http://docsinprogress.org/2012/07/mockumentary-v-documentary/>. Helke, Susanna. “Reality Replayed: Documentary filmmaking and documentary value.” Cineaste. N.p., 2009. Web. 30 Oct. 2012. <http://www.widerscreen.fi/2004/2/reality_replayed>. 24 Hour Party People. Dir. Michael Winterbottom. Revolution Films, 2002. DVD. Man Bites Dog Nichols, Bill. “The Domain of Documentary.” Representing Reality: Issues and Concepts in Documentary. Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1999. Print. Roscoe, Jane and Craig Hight Roscoe, Jane. “Man Bites Dog: deconstructing the documentary look.” Journal of Film and Cultural Studies 13.1 (2007): 7-12. Web. 2 Nov. 2012. The Rutles: All You Need is Cash Sicinski, Michael. “F is for Phony: Fake Documentary and Truth’s Undoing.” Cinema Online. N.p., 12 Nov. 2007. Web. 19 Oct 2012. <http://www.cineaste.com/articles/emf-is-for-phony-fake-documentary-and-truths-undoingem>. Steinberg, Susan Torchin, Leshu. “Cultural Learnings of Borat Make for Benefit Glorious Study of Documentary.” Journal of Film and History 38.1 (2011): 53-62. JSTOR. Web. 1 Nov. 2012. Ward, Paul