# data[].attributes.body
One aspect that stood out to me was on page 11 when discussing phase 1. The first part says the filmmaker should assess whether the film should be made and especially if it should be made by them. This is an interesting concept since many films seem to be made with profit being the most important aspect. In regards to ethics, profit should not come before purpose. This concept shows that deep thought should be taken when deciding if a documentary film will be beneficial to the public and if the filmmaker has the knowledge, time, and patience of the subject in order to bring justice to the subject matter.

# data[].attributes.body
Cameraperson directed by Kristien Johnson is a documentary showcasing Johnsons journey in her own documentary filmmaking. It shows snippets from many of her previous works and is almost like a love letter to filmmaking particually the art of documentary. From these snippets I would say Johnson appears to uphold Core Value 3 from the DAWG text which states " Acknowledge your positionally" (pg 9). By showing her documentary filmmaking journey , Johnson is aware of her place behind the camera and as a storyteller. She is aware of her power when telling the various stories of many people from many different backgrounds and nations. She also ties the story back to her own home especially with the clips of her mother showing that everyone has a story including one that is so close to her home life.

# data[].attributes.body
Tititcut Follies is a fascinating film that has many problematic scenes. The film itself brought awarness to the mistreatment of inmates by the guards but in doing so it also expossed the inmates and filmed very personal and humiliating moments. When one of the inmates is undressed and bathing there appears to be no filter to what Wisemen is willing to film to get his point across. I would argue that this breaks Value 5 in the DAWG text which states "Prioritize the needs, wellbeing, and experience of the people associated with your film" (pg 9). I think that Wiseman would argue that the depiction was to give the audiance an idea of the inmates daily lives and to trigger an emotional response. However it is humiliating for the subjects to be filmed in such a nature and it should have been censored more for thier privacy and human dignity in order to meet these values.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe "Cameraperson" to be a documentary of participatory nature, and one that adheres to many of the rules outlined within the DAWG. Johnsons story is stitched together through footage she filmed and compiled herself while trying to maintain as little interference as possible. By being involved while also maintaining authenticity and distance, she is following rule 4 by respecting her subjects autonomy and allowing their actions to set her narrative rather than relying on outside manipulation. This also synergies well with rules 5 and 6, as her subjects needs are met and they are also respected and presented in such a way that the audience is able to understand and empathize with them. Lastly I believe she follows rule 1, as her methods aren't, coercive, oppressive or destructive. In essence the film is a fun, unique subversion of many documentary tropes while also adhering to the rules outlined within the "DAWG' and providing unique insight into its subjects

# data[].attributes.body
The film Tititcut follies is a film that exemplifies many of the standards and proper trappings of a documentary film. In regards to rule six within the DAWG framework I found the bathing scene to be most exemplary. Nudity is often seen as inherently sexual or vulnerable, usually with nude subjects baring themselves to show vulnerability or present themselves as a sexual object. As such many audiences would hold nudity to a certain level of privacy and dignity, which the scene denies its subject. The man is stripped bare and openly mocked while bathing and treated like a child or animal. The scene is gratuitist in its refusal to cut away in order to capture footage that conveys its message. The scene could be read 1 of 2 ways. One such way is that it it goes against rule 6 of the DAWG as it strips its subject of dignity and agency, showing them at their most vulnerable and in essence demeaning them. The other reading of the scene is that it actual exemplifies it as it is treating its audience with dignity by refusing to be censored in order to present its material in a more truthful manner. The film is a bit of a juxtaposition as it doesn't seem to dignify its subjects, but treats its audience with care and respect

# data[].attributes.body
I think the key idea that caught my attention was one of the opening lines actually.  It read that "reality itself is communicated through human communication.....reality is different from the mass of sensory data we receive. Our shared understanding of these things is our reality." (DAWG, 5).  This caught my eye, not only because it was an interesting and philosophical thought in itself, but that it's productive.  Reality is never fixed, for one.  There are many people in this world who guard tradition like the existence of humanity depends on it, but in reality reality is not based on tradition, it just is. And the only way for a society to start to navigate and gravitate towards a similar understanding of reality is to communicate. And that's why this class is so important!

# data[].attributes.body
I think the two principles that caught my eye were #2 and #3, dealing with transparency and positionality respectively. Wielding a camera is wielding power, and I think that goes for more than just documentary principles. All we have to do is look at modern movements to see a correlation between the camera and instances of abrupt change, like the murder of George Floyd or further back to Rodney King. With #2, I think that it is important to be up front with your intentions but also that taking transparency further with your own message and vulnerabilities.

# data[].attributes.body
I thought that Cameraperson was a rather ethereal and self-reflective experience. The last line of her opening text reveals what I believe to be the core of her intent with this documentary. "These are images that have marked me and leave me wondering still." She has witnessed so many different events and occurrences, many of which are traumatic. I think that in her revisitation of these events, she was in a sense dealing with a shared trauma while sharing that trauma with us as an audience. Since these are videos taken from other projects and pieced together as a memoir, rather than something shot with intent as a documentary, I think her positionality is what you make of it in a sense. In those documentaries she took part in, I certainly think she adhered to some principles of the core values as described by DAWG. The most obvious I would suggest is respecting the dignity of her subjects. But if we were to discuss #3, I would bring up the scene with her and her mother. I think that by showcasing that, she not only acknowledged her own vulnerability but her positionality in her ability and willingness to put herself in that position and share it, which also ties into #2 and transparency.

# data[].attributes.body
Film 1: Choose One Scene from this film that poses an ethical dilemma that deals with positions of power. This can be between inmates and guards, Wiseman and the inmates, yourself as a viewer and the inmates, etc. Describe the scene (1-2 sentences) and elaborate on how this scene does or does not touch on the “6 Core Values” outlined in the DAWG (Documentary Accountability Working Group) framework.

# data[].attributes.body
Cameraperson is a film that respects many of the core values of filmmaking, if not all of them. Most of her shots are close up and intimate, and the subject seems comfortable and open, meaning they more than likely explicitly agreed to be on camera. She also does not consider herself a mere "onlooker" or just a "camera", which would mean recording things devoutly without ever interfering, she helped when and where she could, especially with comforting her subjects. She also did not let her vision for the project blind her to the subjects needs. While she's interviewing the boy who's brother got blown up with the rocket, she has him recount the story. Once he's finished, she asks another question further - "Do you ever see these things when you're dreaming"? (Johnson, 50:30) and he doesn't hear her because he is lost in his thoughts for a moment. He asks for her to repeat the question, but she doesn't. Instead, she stops herself and when he questions it, she says "You're hurting." and he agrees and lets him sit for a second because there is then a cut in between. Then the next thing we hear from Kirsten is that she's crying. She not only respects these people's needs, but she usable to empathize with them not just as subjects but as people.

# data[].attributes.body
Almost all of the scenes stuck out to me in regards to core value #6, but to pick one specifically I would say the beginning of the film, when the patients (more like inmates) are getting examined by the guards to make sure there is nothing on them that could hurt them or others.  The camera goes from patient to patient being examined, and although there are some shots of only the chest up, most of these shots show their entire naked body. Although blurrification in regards to censorship was probably not a thing yet in the 1960s, there are many ways to frame and crop a video to keep the private parts of these patient's bodies out of the camera's view.  This particular scene is important because the sheer amount of people being filmed proves that most likely not everyone (if anyone) signed an agreement to be filmed, let alone be filmed naked.  Core value 6 is the act of "Treating all potential audiences with dignity, care, and concern" (DAWG, 11-14) and f you are filming someone without their consent, especially in a very vulnerable position like this one, it goes directly against the idea of treating anyone with dignity.

# data[].attributes.body
One thing that stuck out to me was the scene between the doctor and the man with supposed schizophrenia. On the surface, and without any other context, this "inmate" seems like a totally normal individual. It struck me that he was so adamant about returning to regular prison, being seemingly happy with his arrangement. In the asylum, he lost many freedoms he had while in regular incarceration. It definitely seemed like he was, or at least felt like, being trapped and held against his will even further beyond the normal circumstances of his sentence, almost as if he was tricked into being taken to the hospital. In terms of touching on core values as described by DAWG, I think one must take a quick step and adjust their perception of reality. On a surface level, it might seem like an entire disregard for the humanity of the subjects presented. However, I believe it actually does humanize these people, even if captured against their will (figuratively, filmic, etc.). How else can people paint truth to the real without exposing that which makes us uncomfortable? As much as documentary work tries to align itself in a purely anthropological sense, it never will. A film's entire goal is to make someone feel a certain way, no matter the conscious goal of its director.

# data[].attributes.body
One scene is a scene that I often remember while rewatching this film is when an inmate complains about his unfair treatment and need to get out of the institution. The people who hear him tell him that he does not seem to be getting better and needs to continue to stay there. Before this scene, there was a scene in which one of the people listening to the inmate was talking on the phone to make plans for their family. This scene breaks code 1, which is to integrate anti-oppression practices into your work (DAWG 11-14). The inmate was experiencing ableism: the fact that people helping him were in fact not helping him at all and making his treatment worse. While complaining, no one stood by his side to agree with him, making him singled out from the rest of the people.

# data[].attributes.body
What are some key terms, ideas, and/or concepts that caught your attention in the DAWG text, "From Reflection to Release"? Why do you find these terms/ideas/concepts useful to think about in relation to documentary filmmaking and ethics?

# data[].attributes.body
Film 2: What are your reactions to Cameraperson in terms of how Johnson negotiates her own position as a filmmaker with who and what is in front of the camera? Are there any/all of the “6 Core Values” that you feel Johnson upholds, if so how do you think she is doing this in her film?

# data[].attributes.body
One scene I would like to describe in Tititcut Follies is the interview sequence between one of the guards and an inmate who was questioned about his crime an underage individual. The sequence between the two I am describing is when the inmate was questioned about his masturbation activity as well as his homosexual. This scene illustrates a clear power dynamic the guard holds over the inmate where they have the authority to ask anything about the prisoner, including information about their sexual orientation which would otherwise be personal, sensitive information. The core values from DAWG that this scene overlooks are values 3 and 4. Wiseman does not seem to acknowledge his positionality and the power he holds with the camera where he can film the prisoners being questioned about their sexuality with no repercussions. This scene also ignores value 4 because it only views the prisoners as some sort of spectacle and no real people with agency. This was furthered illustrated by footage of the prisoners changing while still naked.

# data[].attributes.body
This film is filled with ethical dilemmas in the field of positional power but the scene that stood out the most to me was when the man was forced to eat through the tube and strip naked in front of everyone. The idea displays such a contrast in power first because the man is the only person within the scene nude while all the guards are fully clothed. He is then strapped down and forced to eat through his nose. This is extremely uncomfortable for the viewer to watch and is definitely uncomfortable and even painful for the man. Taking a COVID test was bad; I could only imagine having a tube stuck so deep that it made it to my throat for food intake. I think this film lacks most of the core values of non-fiction filmmaking but the core value that I think is least represented is value 5. I think this film does very little to prioritize the needs of the individuals depicted within the film. This is obviously hard because the director can’t directly change how the prisoners are treated but he could try to do more at the end of the film to demonstrate how we can make changes. I think the film could have ended with maybe some ways of how the average person could help change the prison system or add funds to groups trying to rehabilitate or improve the lives of these prisoners.

# data[].attributes.body
On page 20 of DAWG it says "Filmakers consider the economic impact of production on participants.." I feel like this is such a huge part of docs that people look over. For some of the most famous docs that are known worldwide, the subjects of the movie do not get paid a dime! I do not see how it is common in the industry that actors get paid residuals and large amounts but for people who do docs regardless if they chose to be in do not get some type of financial benefit. It is only fitting that the main focus of a film regardless of what it is gets paid for it.

# data[].attributes.body
My reaction to Camerperson in terms of how Johnson negotiates her position in relation to the film is a somewhat observational perspective of filmmaking. We as the viewer do get a sense of Johnson’s involvement in the film because she is often asking personal questions and building a relationship with the individuals within the film. I think the rest of the film does feel very observational as a lot of the footage is guided by short dialogue and footage that often allows for the viewer to make their own assumptions of the topic at hand. I think the two values that I found the most prominent within the film are 1 and 4. The film demonstrates value one because the film aims to tell honest and personable stories. Some of the stories may not be agreed with but the film shows all sides and perspectives of the specific topics. I would also say the film demonstrates value 4 because of the participation of  individuals that were directly involved with events described in the film. We see all the emotions and feelings displayed even if not the interview form such as when we see the boxer backstage disappointed in his defeat.

# data[].attributes.body
I'd like to focus on the scene from 47:52-53:17. It is showing a man struggling and at his worst as well as being aggressively/poorly managed by the guards. He is being forced fed by putting a straw through his nose and holding him down so that he cannot resist. On page 33 of the DAWG reading it talks about considerations you need to make when releasing a film and what affects your film will have on them. In this film it is clear that the director does not care at all about the individuals and the effect it might have on them. Not having their consent exploits not only them but their friends and loved ones. He is not following rule 2 and is doing whatever he sees fit which causes a power dynamic which is not how a documentary should be.

# data[].attributes.body
Something that caught my attention from this reading is the concept that the filmmaker can do more harm than good even when they may have the best intentions. They must respect their subjects, and in the 6 core values explained in DAWG, specifically 5 and 8, the protection and respect of the filmmakers subjects are of the highest priority, and I think this is something that will help a film be more successful. Doing like Johnson did in Cameraperson and actually checking in on their subjects and their emotions and feelings towards the film and how they’re feeling in the time is something that is valued and not always executed.  Alli Johnson

# data[].attributes.body
One concept that stuck out to me was the idea of the relationship that a filmmaker has with their films. I like how the essay demonstrates how a filmmaker transfers their concepts through their practice to participants eventually landing at film festivals that help fund and continue their practice. I think this idea leads into the 6 core values of non-fiction filmmaking from the DAWG essay and how we can view and analyze them. The idea that really struck me was value 4 and representation within a given film. I find the idea of expert representation within a film to be important because it makes the film authentic and more personal. I think the lack of representation of individuals associated with the subject matter at hand makes the films less relatable.

# data[].attributes.body
In Johnson’s film, Cameraperson, she stays mainly uninvolved while having her moments of interference. I think she does a great job at following the core values from DAWG, as she respects her subjects and seems to prioritize their comfortability when filming. Apart from the few times she chooses to make an intentional sound/comment or appearance she stays pretty uninvolved and instead mainly just observes and watches. We get this understanding through the way she chooses to film, such as the distance from her subjects and the angles she takes as to not be directly center framed for all the subjects filmed. She remains a fly on the wall in most instances. Alli Johnson

# data[].attributes.body
The rules that I seen Johnson administer the most in her film were rules 2,4,5. The scene I wanted to focus on was 1:19:04-1:21:50. This was an absoluting heartbreaking scene to watch especially considering how easy it could have been to save the baby with the supply of oxygen. A rule that was shown here was 5 as she stepped away from her role as a director and was going to help try to save this babies life. She is prioritizing the people in the film instead of treating them as subjects. In her relationships with people in the film it seems she upholds this system of rules with her prioritizing the safety of her cast.

# data[].attributes.body
Within “From Reflection to Release”, I found myself very impressed by the thorough set of core values set out within the text. What caught my eye the most was about the harmful implications a filmmaker can bring through visibility. Normally, one would believe that visibility is something positive where the subject’s story can be heard and acknowledged by others to bring light to some sort of issue. However, one should always consider the consent of the subjects as well as the repercussions the filmmaker may bring by making the subjects visible to those with bad intentions.

# data[].attributes.body
A scene that stood out to me that deals with an ethical dilemma that deals with positions of power is the one where Jim is fed food through a tube. There are a few scenes that could be argued with positions of power, but this one is one that I still have been thinking about even after viewing the film. The guards tie down a naked Jim and force-feed him food through a tube after asking him how he prefers to be fed but never get a response from him. This scene and film don’t respect, in my opinion, the 6 core values outlined in DAWG, as a few of them specifically #4 as it specifies that a film should “respect the dignity and agency of the people in your film” and I think this scene in particular can definitely be argued that it goes against that, and in retrospect it’s a great way to show a dramatic yet realistic-feeling of inside a twisted institution, but the way it impacts the viewer and probably the cast is arguably unethical.
Alli Johnson

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that Johnson’s position in this film was blatantly a self-reflexive one. Using the way she describes this film as a personal memoir, she reflects upon her impact as a cameraperson and a filmmaker upon the subjects of her film. Cameraperson is a deliberate look at the sides of documentary that were overlooked and deleted; Johnson giving visibility to her subject in ways that don’t conform to any hidden agenda. One scene around the end of the film even shows Johnson revisiting one of her previous subjects in order to have an open, honest dialogue with them about how she has portrayed them. Johnson clearly upholds the the new phase of nonfiction filmmaking called reflection right before any stage of research and pre-production.

# data[].attributes.body
I think the key idea that catches my eye of the DAWG is the six core values. ( DAWG, 7-9) It really teaches me how to make a documentary film professionally. I think it's important to be objective, and respectful of what I'm doing, so the audience can feel the same way as I did, they would like my documentary film. I believe the audience can see the hard work of the filmmaker after watching their product.

# data[].attributes.body
As a documentary, this film is doing very badly. Because we can find, the director has not shown enough of respect to the interviewee. We can find this unrespect in the between 23:30 to 24:00, these people are being shot by camera when they are wear nothing in the body. It's pretty different than what we read in the DAWG that" Respect the dignity & Agency of the people in the film" Since it's a documentary if the director does not show enough respect to the interviewee, the documentary will also lose the truth from the audience.

# data[].attributes.body
This is an Observational mod document, and we didn't hear the god voice behind the documentary. On the other hand, we also can hear she made some interviews of people in front of the camera. I feel the director is try to lead interviewee has more space to tell the story she want to share with auidence especially the emotion of the interviewee, when they are feeling sad or getting cry.

# data[].attributes.body
Johnson makes her position behind the camera known, (setting up shots, a gasp here or a sneeze there) but doesn't speak directly to participants often. One scene where she does decide to speak up is when a young mother at an abortion clinic says she feels like "bad female" for having a second unexpected pregnancy. The nurse and Johnson both reassure the young woman that everything will be alright and to not speak that way about herself.  In this way she upholds number 5 of the DAWG principles-- "prioritizing the needs, well-being, and experience of the people associated with your film" (10). Even though she is supposed to be the non-interfering titular cameraperson, Johnson prioritizes the needs/feelings of the young woman and decides to speak up.

# data[].attributes.body
I'd like to focus on the tube feeding scene. Footage of the participant forcibly being tube fed is cut together with other brief, yet hard-to-watch clips of a corpse being prepared for burial. (47:00-53:40) Though it is possible, it's unlikely that Wiseman had established a rapport and built trust with each participant he filmed, as well as the family of the person being prepared for burial. DAWG discusses the importance  of having "trusted relationships with people with lived experience" (13), as well as informed consent (39). It seemed like at a lot of points during the film that some participants weren't aware they were being filmed, and it is also possible that some participants were incapable of informed consent. I was at first going to say that the tube feeding scene, because it sort of directly depicts a participant's loss of agency, broke DAWG rules, but if Wiseman was trying to "offer an understanding of the systems at play that inform and motivate the characters in the story" (31) he does show the power dynamic at play between the guards and patients. However, he doesn't really "avoid appealing to sensationalism" by showing both feeding and corpse (31).

# data[].attributes.body
One scene from the film that poses a strange dilemma to me is when the man is talking about sexually assaulting an eleven year old girl (0:04:26 to 0:06:20, Wiseman). While I do think this man should suffer for his crimes, and should be shamed for what he has done, I think it is unethical to publicize the story of his family. He talks about sexually assaulting his daughter and this becoming public information in this way seems to violate the 6th core value in DAWG (9). By airing this information, the world is now privy to the daughter's trauma and her private moments. This is not something that should be Wiseman's decision to make public.

# data[].attributes.body
One important concept that stood out to me is in the reflection section of the 6 phases. In the key considerations it is highlighted that a filmmaker can still cause harm even with the best intentions (12, DAWG). This stood out to me because it highlights the first core value which asks if the filmmaker is truly the best person to tell a certain story (8, DAWG). Sometimes someone may want to tell a certain story, or be so passionate about a certain subject that they want to do something about it, but that topic coming from their lips may not be correct because they have not had the experiences that allow them to tell the story of a certain population.

# data[].attributes.body
The term positionality is used in one of the core values from this proposal. The term refers to the position of the filmmaker in terms of their personal experience, social relationships, and preconceptions. It’s important to put into context the unique perspective of the filmmaker, as this shapes how they might capture and present a story. If filmmakers don’t acknowledge their view of the world and the context of their lives, a story can be vulnerable to unseen bias. Only when a story is presented along with the unique lens it is being viewed through from can you approach an ethical portrayal of a subject.

# data[].attributes.body
One of the values that Johnson upholds in Cameraperson is the acknowledgment of positionality. While Johnson never directly states her position, her role behind the camera is highlighted throughout the film in the way the camera calmly follows various subjects. In the act of choosing what to keep within the frames of the camera, Johnson’s position as an observer is made known. In specific cases, such as when she observed a struggling infant, her position as essentially a bystander is highlighted. Never interfering, the distant observer role behind the camera is consistent and helps to establish Johnson’s position.

# data[].attributes.body
The power dynamic present in the film that I would like to comment on is between Wiseman and Jim. In particular, the scene where the camera observed Jim laying naked in the cell. In these moments, the power dynamic somewhat breaks from the 6 core values presented by DAWG. Namely, the aim to respect the dignity and agency of the people in the film and prioritizing the needs and well-being of those individuals. By portraying these moments of vulnerability Wiseman borders on in-dignifying Jim’s image. While it may be based on a desire to improve conditions for this individual, portraying Jim in this state brings to attention the sensitive relationship Wiseman and the camera have in this incredibly revealing space.

# data[].attributes.body
One term I found interesting is concept #2, to be transparent in the relationship and the filmmaker relays the purpose of the film (8, DAWG). I find this concept to be strong factor in these films as it allows all involved in the process of making the film to understand the mission of the film and feel comfortable with the direction of the filmmaker. Also, concept #5, to prioritize the wellbeing of people associated with the film (9, DAWG). This concept makes sure that everyone in the process is being reassured of their own health and wellbeing and that the process of the film is not taxing on their life. The filmmaker has a job to prioritize the dignity, wellbeing, and experience of all those associated with the film (9, DAWG). I have found that when a filmmaker/director prioritizes the people that have put forth great effort in producing the film of their desires that the best possible product is created and that the film finds great success as a result.

# data[].attributes.body
"Cameraperson" showcases a strong sense of ethical and empathetic filmmaking. Johnson presents herself as an engaged and sensitive filmmaker, actively involved in the lives of her subjects while maintaining a respect for their autonomy and dignity. Johnson's film is rooted in capturing real moments and experiences. She presents unfiltered footage, often without voiceover or heavy editing, allowing the viewer to witness events as they unfold. By prioritizing truth and authenticity, Johnson aims to provide a genuine portrayal of her subjects' lives. Also, Johnson's film showcases her empathy and compassion for her subjects. Which again connects to #4 respecting the subjects (9, DAWG). She captures intimate and personal moments, giving viewers a glimpse into the emotional and human aspects of the individuals she films. Through her cinematography, she fosters a connection between the audience and the subjects, allowing for empathy to flourish.

# data[].attributes.body
The scene I want to expand on is the scene we viewed with Jim being shaved and naked with the guards around him. The guards try to pester and make Jim feel uncomfortable the entire scene, repeatedly asking him the same question that he keeps answering (25-32). #4 in the article discusses how their is a rule to "respect the dignity and agency of the people in your film" (9, DAWG). Jim was naked being shaved, he got a nasty cut that was bleeding on the corner of his mouth. The whole experience is very stressful, so Wiseman must have had to construct a strong relations to the subjects to film certain scenes. The dilemma that resides in the scene observes the guards disregard for the humanity of Jim, and Wiseman capturing Jim and giving the visual of being an observer of Jim in his cell.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that all 6 core values are important and I hadn't thought about most of them before honestly. I will say thought that I think main subjects in documentaries should have contracts to be paid some amount as actors do because if they are being vulnerable and truthful about their experience and helping a movement or narrative along, they should be compensated. I also love the statement of listening to subjects feedback and not just treating them like sob stories or damaged people who can help you gain sympathy or upset an audience rather than someone who can participate and give their opinions about what type of footage or resources could help a documentary be more informative/impactful.

# data[].attributes.body
Johnson's position as a filmmaker switches from scene to scene as sometimes she just lets the camera be still and doesn't say anything and other times the camera has purposeful movement and she is responsive with the subject. Although that is an important thing to question, I really did see this as more of a collection of moments she chose (like how she states in text at the beginning of the film) that made a mark on her in some way. So rather than me trying to focus on any narrative, I was trying to put myself in her shoes and piece together why each scene would've been special or emotional for her. It makes the perspective a little biased which is fine since this isn't a film that is trying to invoke one specific type of message or social change but the way it's edited definitely makes you see things through her eyes and her opinions whenever she speaks back and forth with subjects. I do think she touches on all 6 core values in one scene or another. Because it's all mismatched and the time frame changes and locations, no scene has the same energy but It's obvious she cares about the wellbeing of her subjects and their confidentiality if they requested that visually.

# data[].attributes.body
Although almost every scene in this film has some dynamic of positions of power, one that stands out to me is the scene where the man is fed food through  tube in his nose since he hasn't been eating enough. The power dynamic here would be with the inmate and the head man of the institution as he is in charge of forcing inmates to eat by any means necessary. (I assume because if they die then the institution won't keep getting paid by their family members or the gov etc.) It's an uncomfortable scene because not only do they bring him out naked and tie his arms down to feed him through the tube, but we never get verbal confirmation that this is what the inmate is agreeing to. It's confusing personally because do you just let them wither away from starvation but let them keep their free will or do you do what you think is "best" for their health even though it's unpleasant. I would say this film lacks a lot of the 6 core values but definitely lacks 4 and 5. I think although it would've been difficult to do with someone mentally ill, getting background on if this patient's experience with this kind of feeding has been happening often or if he doesn't mind/hates the experience would be helpful for creating context. I think this film does not respect the dignity of its subjects prioritize their wellbeing or experience however, times have changed and I think I wouldn't expect any less from an institution or filmmaker from the 60s.

# data[].attributes.body
One aspect of documentary filmmaking that I have not seen addressed directly is the mental and psychological state that doing this work entails. I am particularly interested in the motivation that seems to be overlooked, feelings of vengeance, frustration, anger, rage, and emotional meltdowns that attempting to bear witness to terrible things does to a person. I know for myself the reason I have not tried to engage with my own personal history and early life trauma is related to this looming volcano of outrage, frustration, and despair. This is why I picked up on a particular scene from Cameraperson.

The scene involves Velma, part of the film crew and translator I think, talking about her feelings filming in Sarajevo after the war. She is speaking about the feelings of documentary makers, specifically when conducting interviews with survivors of atrocities:

“Our jobs are hard on us because we somehow process these stories and then we put them inside ourselves. So how do we deal with the trauma, our post-traumatic stress, we who collect stories and share them with the world?” (Cameraperson, Kirsten Johnson, 2016)

Dealing with this level of stress is central to being able to be a documentary filmmaker, and understanding one’s own limits of what one can witness, without falling apart entirely. I felt so stressed watching this film, just “witnessing the witnessing”; I was crying and shaking about the brutality inflicted on innocent people. At one point I stopped watching and went and spoke to my wife for a bit to calm down before resuming.

Velma was focusing on the survivors of the genocide in the Balkan war, particularly folks in Foca, Bosnia, but during that time I was living in London and had news coverage daily about these atrocities. I think I just felt numb to them after a while, and as the genocide in Rwanda was also happening around this time, the two are stored in my memory along with the knowledge of other systematic human rights violations covered by Johnson as a cameraperson. She has been and presumable still is bearing witness to the darkest of inhumanity that seems to keep happening in every corner of the world.

I believe one way of coping with the stress of bearing witness as a filmmaker may be to control the arena of how the film is made. By this I mean, decide to have a non interference policy, so that one is not bringing one’s baggage to the work, letting space for the interviewee to the one who shares how much and in what way their story is being told. For example in the case of the woman explaining that she had been raped (along with others) in front of her community, this story was positioned before her account of the young girls being “disappeared” when they complained about their treatment.

Velma said that she has nightmares about what happened to these people by the warlords/militias that controlled and brutalized and murdered the innocents. I hope that she and the others making the films that are profiled in Cameraperson are getting ongoing help for their PTSD.

# data[].attributes.body
Accountability is the issue voiced by "the people who watch a film place a profound trust in the storyteller" the expectation of truth is assumed - yet the bounds of this can also be touched. For example a film I recently analyzed tells the story of a black Hollywood actress in the 1940s-1950s but the filmmaker used a documentary format even though the character she profiled didn't exist (spoiler alert). She is justified in my opinion for this break with "truth" because there wasn't a real person she could profile, and this was the point of the film, lack of representation by Hollywood of people like her, people in the film industry who are black and queer.