video essay

video essay from Cristen B on Vimeo.




In trying to figure out how to approach doing a video essay, I found myself drawn to Shooting Down Pictures. The videos there, text analysis that acknowledged that the video itself is a text to be manipulated and referenced, used a style I found very approachable. My biggest problem in creating the essay was finding a subject with which I could actually work.

What I discovered was that my normal standards for subjects to do academic work on apparently apply in this new medium as well: something I love enough to know it well, and know well enough to see its problems. I chose Glee because, despite what I argue in the essay, I think it does a better job than most media (and high art) at showing that the world is not made up of straight, white, able-bodied, Christian people. I expected to find what I did find, that the show shortchanges many of its characters, but I also found that it does it in a consistent patterned way, which I doubt I would have noticed if I hadn’t been looking for visual cues. I had no idea the show had such a consistent style until I picked up patterns and realized that scenes were blocked in certain ways to communicate certain things across episodes, and that the breaks from that style meant the show was saying something different.

For example, I had not realized until I began pulling together clips across episodes that the show uses its minority characters as a Greek chorus to comment on the lives of the main characters, and only when separating those characters off by themselves does it allow them to comment on their own lives. The style changes, putting certain characters in different positions in the group, and having consistent choreography to communicate relationships, and I would not have noticed that without having to look for patterns. I actually felt hampered by the time constraints, because there was so much footage and it was hard to make a general argument about the show within a short amount of time. I wish I had another ten minutes to cover just the leitmotifs in choreography, because that’s something that can only be communicated visually.

The ability to use video to communicate my argument was also useful in studying this particular text because it is as much musical as it is visual, and I’m not sure that the text can be fully understood without being able to both see and hear it.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Cristen: I have never seen Glee, and as I said in class, would happily do so if I could always watch it with you analysis underneath. Your voice is clear, forceful, and convincing, engaged in a powerful dialectic with the goofysilly prettiness of the visual track. I am not convinced that NOT seeing you (at any point) is the best choice. Anchoring your critique of the program's subtle racism and homophobia to your own situated position is certainly the "honest" thing to do. The voice of God was always a charlatan: who is behind that curtain...and if seeing you undermines your critique (for some) that seems less critical than allowing them to know that black women are also Voices OG.

Anonymous said...

Cristen: Your video essay “Undermining the Diversity of Glee” is full of insight and demonstrates a close reading of Glee, which I’ve never seen. Despite the fact that I’ve never seen or heard of it, your astute observation that the show “uses its minority characters as a Greek chorus to comment on the lives of the main characters, and only when separating those characters off by themselves does it allow them to comment on their own lives.” is well articulated. I agree with you that attention to patterns of visual/thematic structure in film/television, as well as leitmotifs in choreography, are sometimes difficult to describe because so much takes place in the realm of the purely ‘visual’ and ‘aural’. Your presentation, which relies heavily on narration, is a rereading of the ‘visual’ text, which successfully juxtaposes the narrator’s view (you – as 3rd person POV) creating a primarily ethos based rhetorical standpoint or position.

Your argument that Glee is fluffy fair, that it uses the popular term ‘diversity’ for it’s own benefit and aims, is clearly communicated. However, I also agree with Alex, that if you were to insert aspects of yourself into the essay, you would have more narrative options, i.e. 1st POV (personal monologue), dialogue, as well as narration. When considering “point of view” within a written text, 1st person POV provides the reader/viewer/listener with a certain intimacy that close 3rd person POV, and omniscient POV do not provide or convey. In film, "breaking the fourth wall" (speaking directly to the audience) is a technique that brings the viewer/spectator into the ‘scene’ as a quasi participant. Of course, 'internal monologue' does the same thing.

Anonymous said...

Cristen – your analysis of Glee and how it uses its characters is a study based in literature, film and television. Of all means of visual communication, network TV, as the least common communicating denominator reaches the largest audiences and leaves the strongest subliminal impressions. The general points of your analysis can be applied to almost any film or book in which power dynamics are carried out among different classes and ethnicities. I admire your attention to detail and nuance which gave your essay a visual foundation on which to draw.

Anonymous said...

The issue of "who" is in the lead and who is subordinate in media such as "Glee" is an issue that has an answer in "who" the target audience is, as well as "who" the producers, writers, etc... are. Glee is a show/program I have never seen or heard of, but the picture I get from this analysis is that the focus (most likely monetary based) is apparently leaning in the direction of a predominantly "white" audience. My question is (merely rhetoric of course) why...? I see it that the "perceived" white audience as being the ones that will be most likely "hooked" by the sponsors, and thus spend the extra cash that other "alternate" target audiences (read minority here) may not be able to do. There is a reason for tagging such shows as "commercial" in that they produce "commerce" for the sponsors and so they must maximize their efforts to attract the most "profitable" class of viewers. Fair, doubtful; racist, sexist, etc..., probably; unethical, it depends on how individuals see themselves as being excluded, included, marginalized, victimized, benefiting or not from such an issue.

Post a Comment