A book chapter worth reading in relation to the role narrative plays in new media, which can be applied to k-films and interactive documentary.
Cubitt, Sean. “Spreadsheets, Sitemaps and Search Engines: Why Narrative Is Marginal to Multimedia and Networked Communication, and Why Marginality Is More Vital than Universality.” New Screen Media: Cinema/Art/Narrative. Ed. Martin Rieser and Andrea Zapp. London: British Film Institute, 2002. 1–13. Print.
Interviews with the inventor of Korsakow
(video) INTERVIEW WITH FLORIAN THALHOFER at Universidade Lusófona
http://korsakow.tv/interview-with-florian-thalhofer-at-universidade-lusofona/
(text) A champion of nonlinear narratives: An interview with documentary filmmaker Florian Thalhofer
(video) Florian Thalhofer – Korsakow Software
https://vimeo.com/channels/297850
(video) Interview: Florian Thalhofer von Korsakow-Institut
(In progress)
Here are the links to the presentations groups gave for Project Brief 1 on the following themes in relation to contextualising the studio practice.
Interactive documentary
Presentation slides
Presentation notes
Interactive documentary practice
Presentation slides
Presentation notes
Multilinear narrative/non-narrative
Presentation slides
Presentation notes
Interactive documentary tools
Presentation slides
Presentation notes
Documentary design
Presentation slides
Presentation notes
Plantinga proposes that:
In general, open structures are more episodic, meandering, and idiosyncratic than their formal counterparts, although no film can avoid formal structure all together. Formal structures are motivated by the requirements of conventions of composition. Open structure may be motivated in various ways, by the filmmaker’s associations while filming, by an anthropological experiment or a journey, or by pure chance.(1997 pp.145–6)
…
An open structure, as Plantinga (1997) points out, still requires some type of coherent order. Plantinga states that a ‘pure open structure would render the projected world formless, as though observation had occurred without the direction of the filmmakers’ (1997, p.135). The observational documentaries of Frederick Wiseman are used by Plantinga (1997) as examples of works that successfully explore an open structure for cinema and television viewing. Plantinga cites the example of Wiseman’s Law and Order (1969) as a demonstration of some of the characteristics of an open structure. In Law and Order Wiseman documents and edits together the activities of an urban police unit, following his own perceptions of the activities that take place. Plantinga (1997) proposes that Wiseman’s portrayal contradicts a formal approach taken towards this topic, which would potentially provide context and details of activities that occur in a systematic and clearly defined order. Open structures typically do not rely on narrative causality or establishing a logical ordering of events. The beginning and ending of the work are not necessarily used to provide context for the viewer as they are in formal structures. Plantinga (1997) argues that each sequence of shots in Law and Order is equally important, in contrast to formal structures that use techniques such as voice–over to make some parts more important than others. These characteristics of an open structure draw attention to filmmakers like Wiseman using editing to experiment with the form of documentary and how a topic is communicated to the audience within a linear structure.
Selected excerpts from:
Keen, Seth. “Netvideo Nonvideo Newvideo Designing a Multilinear Nonnarrative Form for Interactive Documentary.” Doctorate. RMIT University Print. p. 6-7
Excerpts on narrative/nonnarrative:
These authors define ‘narrative’ and ‘nonnarrative’ in regards to the form of a documentary and how relations are organised between shots. It is important to point out that in connection with the broad and diverse field of narratology I focus on Bordwell and Thompson’s (2010) distinction between ‘narrative’ and ‘nonnarrative’ as it provides a useful demarcation between two different approaches towards organising relations between shots in a documentary.
Bordwell and Thompson (2010) contextualise definitions of ‘narrative’ and ‘nonnarrative’ by outlining the concept of ‘form’ in film. Form works in unison with content as part of a system that is integrated into an organisational whole (Bordwell & Thompson 2010). They state:
…a film is not simply a random bunch of elements. Like all artworks, a film has form. By film form in its broadest sense we mean the overall system of relations that we can perceive among the elements in the whole film. (2010, p.57)
Bordwell and Thompson describe most documentaries as ‘being organised as narratives, just as fiction films are’ (2010, p.353). However, the authors claim that some documentary forms can be described as ‘nonnarrative’ (2010).
In an evaluation of what constitutes a ‘narrative’ Bordwell and Thompson state:
Typically, a narrative begins with one situation; a series of changes occur according to a pattern of cause and effect; finally, a new situation arises that brings about the end of the narrative. (2010, p.79)
Bordwell and Thompson (2010) propose that cause and effect, along with time, are integral elements that help the audience connect events together into a narrative. They suggest that in most cases in fiction characters, through their actions, play a pivotal role in producing cause and effect in a narrative. Bordwell and Thompson explain that ‘characters create causes and register effects’ (2010, p.82). In regards to the notion of time in Bordwell and Thompson’s analysis, cause and effect occur within temporal constraints. Even when events are presented in an order that is not chronological the audience uses a temporal framework to place events into chronological order. Similarly, in Just to Back a Winner (1991), I followed a punter as a key character and edited his actions together in chronological order as part of demonstrating the cause and effect changes that occurred for that character.
Other motivations are utilised to connect events together into a whole in a nonnarrative (Bordwell & Thompson 2010). The authors identify different types of nonnarrative: ‘categorical’, ‘rhetorical’, ‘abstract’ and ‘associational‘ (Bordwell & Thompson 2010, pp.353–81). In their analysis the ‘categorical form’ is determined by arranging material into a taxonomy that is formulated around a structured process of classification. The ‘rhetorical form’ is motivated by the aim to communicate an argument and is used to direct an audience towards a particular point of view. The ‘abstract’ and ‘associational’ forms are categorised as types of ‘experimental film’ (2010, p.368). In the ‘abstract form’ the documentary maker focuses on using visual attributes to convey a perspective on a topic. Bordwell and Thompson state that the ‘abstract form’ is created around ‘colours, shapes, sizes and movements in the images’ (2010, p.368). The final ‘associational form’, in contrast with the categorical form, connects material together by looking for illogical relationships. A key aspect of this associational form is the juxtapositions that are created through unrelated associations (Bordwell & Thompson 2010).
…following Bordwell and Thompson…I focus on differentiating examples of nonfiction into the categories of: ‘linear narrative’, ‘linear nonnarrative’, ‘mulitlinear narrative’ and ‘mulitlinear nonnarrative’. Although it is possible to use a multilinear structure to create a narrative, or a nonnarrative that has a start and end point, in this inquiry I am specifically interested in exploring a ‘multilinear nonnarrative’ form of documentary that has no beginning, middle or end.
Reference:
Keen, Seth. “Netvideo Nonvideo Newvideo Designing a Multilinear Nonnarrative Form for Interactive Documentary.” Doctorate. RMIT University Print. p. 11-14