Emerging Trend

As veganism and environmental activism has emerged, substitutes for meat products that are both ethical and sustainable have emerged as well. I’m particularly interested in cultured meats, as the products they make aren’t substitutes, rather, they are created by culturing animal cells in vitro (Gaydhane et al. 2018). On the agricultural front, I am interested in this process becoming more economically viable and sustainable, as it could prove to be beneficial in reducing carbon emissions produced by the agricultural industry yearly (Bailey 2024). On the technological front, it can lead to a better understanding of replicating cell structures, and hopefully lead to a future where we are able to synthesize entire organs, which would be instrumental for organ transplantation.

In-Class Studio Time

For this week, we mostly focused our efforts in class on drafting and finalizing a clear picture of what we wanted our performance sketches to look like. Our group settled on the idea of an AI assistant helping an old lady with her daily tasks. Taking inspiration from one of the previous performances, we decided to utilize the screens of our classroom and make use of lighting to signify a transition of spaces. We also planned to make use of OBS and took inspiration from last weeks VJ lecture to immerse the audience in our performance by providing them with a point of view of the characters.

Weekly Reading

This week’s reading focused on our relationship with our objects at home, particularly those that are increasingly smarter and may suggest and dictate actions that are beneficial to us. The project depicts Thomas, an old man used to living in an organized mess struggling to deal with the orders imposed by the smart objects meant to help him. This project is remarkably similar to the performance sketch my group is working on, so I believe we could get inspiration from it in terms of the adversarial relationship between the human and object.

(325 words)

References

Bailey CB (2024), Cultured meat is just too expensive to produce to scale up? That could change dramatically, and soon, Genetic Literacy Project, viewed 29 August 2024, https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2024/08/29/cultured-meat-is-just-too-expensive-to-produce-to-scale-up-that-could-change-dramatically-and-soon/

Gaydhane MK, Mahanta U, Sharma CS, Khandelwal M & Ramakrishna S (2018), ‘Cultured meat: state of the art and future’, Biomanufacturing Reviews, vol. 3, no. 1.

Uninvited Guests — Superflux 2016, Superflux. https://superflux.in/index.php/work/uninvited-guests/#

References:

Candy S, Kornet K (2019) ‘Turning Foresight Inside Out: An Introduction to Ethnographic Experiential Futures’, Journal of Future Studies, 3(3): 3–22, DOI:10.6531/JFS.201903_23(3).0002

Originality.ai (n.d.) Amount of AI Content in Google Search Results – Ongoing Study 2019, Originality.ai, accessed 30 August 2024, https://originality.ai/ai-content-in-google-search-results

Week 1:

COMM2627 – Week 1 Blogpost (Vlog Reflection)

Week 2:

COMM2627 – Week 2 Blogpost (Vlog Reflection)

Week 3:

COMM2627 – Week 3 Blogpost (Written Reflection)

The performance work I researched this week is the comedy play “Peter Pan Goes Wrong”. It is a theatre production with the premise of a normal play based on Peter Pan that goes wrong while the actors have to go through with it despite the circumstances. Of course, this is all staged.

I find the use of audience engagement in this play in the service of comedy to be interesting, despite plays not typically having audience interaction. The actor of Captain Hook often reacts in frustration by the audience’s reaction, whether they are booing him, or making fun of him. Not only does this serve to heighten the audience’s investment in the play, it also works to craft the illusion that this play is going wrong, and that not all of it is scripted. I think it is important to also note that the heckling is most likely done by members of the production in order to stimulate the rest of the crowd to make fun of the actors. The play also utilizes the weaknesses of theatre in service of its comedy. The reuse of actors, awkwardness of switching sets and props, are all used to poke fun at the medium.

As for this week’s studio, we got to act out and witnesses everyone’s performance sketches. From observing other sketches, I have learnt of the importance of immersing the audience through atmosphere. A group utilized green screen as a cost effective way to set up a faux stage with props in order to set the environment of their performance. Another utilized lighting to their advantage as a way of transitioning between the online and offline space. In the future, I hope to utilize more creative tools to enhance an audience’s immersion.

For this week’s reading, the ABC article written by Purtill (2024) caught my attention. Focusing on the increased prevalence of AI generated spam content that permeates X (formerly known as Twitter), it paints a bleak reality and future of the internet, which I feel relates to the course. In particular, the article points out the increasing difficulty of identifying authentic and trustworthy content on the internet, which I feel would be an interesting topic to explore in performance. Such a performance could serve as a dystopian warning against the lack of online regulation, and the impacts on the beliefs and views this can have on people.

(397 words)

References:

Lewis H, Sayer J, Shields H (2013), “Peter Pan Goes Wrong”, Mischeif Theatre Company, Pleasance Theatre, London. https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8l0fqa

References:

1. In what ways do you hope your screenings/exhibited/screened work (whether individual or group produced) engaged its audience and communicated a key concern of the studio?

The primary impact goal we were aiming for was to increase the awareness of queer-dedicated spaces in Melbourne and to motivate our audience to participate and support these spaces. This obviously meant hopefully increasing the foot traffic of our main subject of the video, Flippy’s Queer Bar, but increased traffic for queer spaces in general would be our larger goal. As our studio is focused on how documentary storytelling and distribution can lead to social impact, I hope that our film communicated the ways in which documentary could effectively do this to our audience through the way we presented and framed the locale we were shooting at, as well as the way we structured the editing of our interview with our subject.

2. Imagine you are going to keep working on that media piece (e.g. to screen it somewhere else like a festival, or develop it into a different kind of work, and so on) – what would be the core things you would want to improve and extend and why?

As our current project is merely a proof of concept, we are hoping to continue our media piece by making it a ~40 minute documentary. While trying to find different funding for the project, we realized that most organizations wanted longer, full length documentaries rather than short ones, so for practicality we might have to adapt to that. With this funding, we may be able to pay fro screenings of our film when it has reached completion.

This isn’t too much of a worry, as we plan to interview more subjects from different parts of Melbourne’s queer nightlife scene. This will give us much more content to work with, diversify the presentation and look of the documentary, as well as give a larger variety in the voices we grant to the queer scene in Melbourne. Our hopes are that this will give a more accurate, truthful and more interesting overview of queer nightlife over fixating on a specific locale, with the hopes of drawing a variety of people into these scenes for their participation and support.

On the topic of teamwork, while I believe our group does work pretty well together, I believe we have areas we could improve on, namely communicating expectations before meetings. While our only conflict was a mostly a result of a tight schedule, it could have been remedied if we had communicated a bit better.

On a personal front, I would like to focus on learning skills that I didn’t originally possess when I first got into the project. I would like to become more familiar with editing software and the smaller things that it is capable of. Mainly, I would like to focus on color grading and sound design. I found that my group mates had to pick up these roles as I was unfamiliar with them, and I believe our workflow could have been more efficient if I was able to do both in my own time.

3. From your studio, reflect on an aspect of two other students/group’s media work on the website in terms of specific insights they produced about a key idea addressed by the studio?

‘Leftovers to Landfill’ focused its message on food waste and what the average consumer could do about it. One of the ways in which it incites social change is pretty simple, the documentary directly spells out the ways in which the average consumer can combat food waste – through reuse of materials and composting. From a narrative standpoint, the use of the participatory mode emphasizing the interviewer as someone as equally uneducated on the matter eases the audience into the topic, as they may not feel like they are alone in this journey of learning.

‘Rewilding’ focused its message on the environmental impact non-biodegradable trash has on the ocean. I appreciated the stark contrast of the intro between the serene and beautiful scenery of the ocean into much more combative scenes of the ocean filled with trash, as well as sound bytes of the rise of pollution in the ocean. I believe it does a good job at inciting a sense of urgency within the audience, and to remind them what is at risk of being lost if we don’t do something about it. I also like the b-roll included of efforts to clean up the ocean. It highlights that while things may seem dire, we still have the power to combat it in some ways.

4. For the other studio website you engaged with,  describe a key idea that you think the finished media/studio work communicated with reference to a specific example (i.e. a particular individual/group work)

The studio ‘Together in Electric Dreams’ focuses on the use and capabilities of generative AI in media. One of the works from the studio “re_generate”, is created using archives of the creators and the internet in an attempt to capture elements of memory. I appreciate this approach, as generative AI often creates media that is an amalgamation of different media relating to the prompts given to it. While this means none of the works are technically ‘original’, ‘re_generate’ leans into this trait of generative AI to create a work that gives the audience a feeling of memory and nostalgia, as it combines the common experience4s shared by many and presents it as a single work. I believe this work has successfully given me more insight to how generative AI could be used in media, communicating the key concern of the studio.

https://vimeo.com/manage/videos/952193375

https://shorturl.at/sSBaN

This blog will serve as a reflection of my experience throughout the making of my groups impact documentary and what I have learned from this experience.

While my opinions of the code of conduct of making a documentary has not changed drastically, with formal experience I am much more capable of linking my experiences to what has been taught to me throughout the semester.

For our proposal, Rosenthal, Alan and Eckhardt (2015) outlined the necessities of a good documentary proposal. The consistent theme of their suggestions was specificity. When given feedback about our proposal, many things that we have not considered were highlighted to us, such as the need for a specific psychographic and demographic for our audience, exact story beats, and exact intentions of our film. This lack of specification in terms of story structure also made it so our events were less “loud” and “strong”, important aspects highlighted by Cheryl Dunye (2017).

I believe that keeping these aspects in mind will be important if we continue this project, as it projects an image of confidence and interest in what we are doing, which may make it more appealing to funders, generating interest in the project.

When drafting our documentary, our group expressed some interest in the poetic mode of documentary, similar to what Nichols (2017) outlined. As the filming went on however, the contents of the footage matched a performative mode much more instead, and we had to go with that. To me, this reflected the fluid nature of documentary making, and how filmmakers must adapt to circumstances for the best output.

In terms of ethics, Ruby (2005) states 3 moral contracts a filmmaker must abide by. To produce an image that is a true reflection of the intent when making the image; to have a moral obligation to the subject; and to have a moral obligation to the audience.

While editing, I found that these sometimes came in conflict with one another. The intent of our documentary was to focus on the importance of queer nightlife venues and the joy it brought, and while our subject held mostly positive views about these venues, they did bring up negative experiences associated with them as well.

Trying to stick to our original idea sometimes felt a bit exploitative, as we would be omitting the complexities of our subject’s experiences in favour of our narrative. Would it be a lie by omission? Would we be misleading our audiences of the ‘reality’ of these venues? In the future, if time allows, I would like to have a stronger channel of communication with our subject to discuss the intricacies of what to omit and what to include.

While collaborating, because of my relative inexperience with filmmaking, I learnt a lot from my team. For example, while I knew the importance of noting down the existence of the camera, to make it so the image is as “natural as possible as stated by Rosenthal (1996), I didn’t consider how clapping too loud to sync the audio might startle subjects and ruin shots, as pointed out by my D.O.P.

Another example would be how to “link” shots with each other. I used to cut between clips and shots rather carelessly, but now I understand the importance on cutting on moments of stillness to make those cuts less jarring, or to match the velocity of an object with another in the next clip to make it flow better.

In terms of conflict resolution, the Impact Field Guide by Doc Society (n.d.) states the importance of getting everyone on the same page. While I believe my team did communicate well with one another, I believe improvements could have been made.

For example, we assumed that meeting up in person to discuss matters related to the project would be a more efficient way to arrive at an agreement. While this was true, there was a gap in communication and it caused some members to go into our meetings with different expectations, leading to conflict. I believe that in the future, it would serve us well to set expectations of what is happening well in advance with more diligence.

Beyond what has been done, our group has yet to dictate how we will get our film to reach broader audiences. The plan so far is to reach out to funders in order to raise fund to get spots in film festivals, therein raising awareness of our film which hopefully raises the interactions we may get for social media, which could be pivoted into accomplishing our impact goals. Only time will tell how this turns out.

Overall, I believe my experience throughout the making of our project has taught me a lot about the intricacies of filmmaking. It’s easy to read about the do’s and don’ts from guidebook, and while helpful, you never truly understand a situation until you experience it. I hope that we will improve our skills in terms pitching, subject communication, and team communication as we move forward with the project. I believe that this will improve our chances to raise funds for our project, and result in a better output overall.

(856 words)

References

Doc Society (n.d.) The Impact Field Guide & Toolkit. [online] Available at: https://impactguide.org/.

Nichols B (2017) Introduction to documentary, third edition, Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

O’Brein K (2017) ‘Documentarian Cheryl Dunye on what makes a great story’

, The Drum, accessed 31 May 2024. https://www.thedrum.com/news/2017/08/16/documentarian-cheryl-dunye-what-makes-great-story

Rosenthal A (1996), Writing, Directing, and Producing Documentary Films and Videos, Fourth Edition.

‌Rosenthal A & Eckhardt N (2016), Writing, directing, and producing documentary films and digital videos, Fifth Edition, Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale.

Ruby J (2005) New Challenges for Documentary: The Ethics of Image Making, Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Pitch Document – Where are all the Queers

Reflection:

This blog will focus on my reflection on the impact documentaries Wildness (2012) and The Winterkeeper (2023); and how I plan to draw on the techniques, modes, and devices used to inform the production of my group’s own documentary in the upcoming assignments.

Wildness (2012) is a documentary by Wu Tsang, focusing on the patrons of The Silver Platter, most of which are Latina trans-women. Despite Wu Tsang himself being a transgender person of color (a transgender bi-racial Chinese American), Oishi (2015:253) points out that despite the superficial similarities, he is still distinct from the community he strives to “give a voice” to.

As Ruby (2005:211) states, the filmmaker has a moral obligation to the subjects of the film. As a cishet Chinese Malaysian working on a documentary focused on LGBTIQ+ nightlife, I could not be more separated from the subjects of our film. Wildness (2012) highlights the significance of such a role. Tsang himself acknowledges his conflict between representing an underrepresented minority and the problems that come with speaking on the behalf of experiences not his own (Oishi 2015:253).

In a blog post, Tsang reflects on his authority as a director, and how this authority can be asserted by removing themselves from the film, to keep up an illusion of objectivity (Oishi 2015:262). With this, he emphasizes the power a director holds over their subjects. Interestingly, many of my classmates had complaints about Tsang’s actions that were presented in the documentary. If Tsang had chosen to cut himself out of the documentary, would his actions even be brought to attention to be criticized?

Instead, Tsang chooses to portray his role in relation to The Silver Platter in its entirety. He has chosen to ensure the audience understands and recognizes his presence and acknowledge the separation he has from the community he chooses to represent. I believe this highlights the ethical concerns over the authority the director holds over their subjects. It will be important for me to keep this in mind as we move forward with our documentary.

Outside of ethics, Wildness (2012) does a fantastic job at capturing the feelings and environment of its setting using both the camera and editing. When the bar and nightlife is portrayed, close-ups of the patrons are presented to the audience in addition to fast choppy cuts to encapsulate a bit of the crowdedness and claustrophobia of the bar.

In contrast, I particularly appreciate how Tsang chooses to film his interviews with the bar owners. They are set up during the off-hours of the bar, where the only thing illuminating the space is the sunlight, capturing still close-ups of different artifacts of the bar, with footage of the owners going through their daily tasks in preparation for the bar’s opening, highlighting the efforts of the owners in maintaining safe spaces like this. I believe a similar technique could be used in our documentary for the same effect.

The Winterkeeper (2023) follows Steven Fuller, a winter caretaker who has lived in Yellowstone national park for 50 years. It is focused on warning the audience of the climate crisis that threatens to change the environments that we know and live in. However, the film takes a more passive stance in advocating for this; mostly portraying the beauty of Yellowstone through Fullers daily life, reflections, and thoughts about the park and its future.

The film mainly uses an expository mode, like what Nichols (2017:109) outlines. Fuller acts as our narrator, talking about his job and experience with working and living in Yellowstone. While this can be a good mode to represent the authentic feelings of a subject’s thoughts and experiences, as mentioned in my reflection on Wildness (2012), it may also be used to project a false sense of authenticity. At the end of the day, the director holds the authority over what is represented, even if the voice is not their own.

As our group has discussed the possibility of following a bartender’s shift throughout a night at a LGBTIQ+ bar as part of the storyline of our documentary, it will be important to note the ethical concerns with using someone’s voice as our own. We should maintain a line of consistent communication (Nichols 2017:43) with our primary subjects to ensure we don’t twist or misrepresent their words, as I hope The Winterkeeper (2023) has done.

The Winterkeeper (2023) starts off with a brief introduction to Yellowstone. Fuller then describes his work as a winter caretaker, what he appreciates about his lifestyle, the positive memories associated with Yellowstone, and caps it off with his concerns about the park’s future. I believe the intention of the formatting of this story is to put the audience in Fuller’s shoes, to make them sympathize and understand him, in the hopes of invoking the same concerns Fuller has for the environment in the audience.

I believe a similar style of storytelling could be used if we plan to follow a subject throughout the night at an LGBTIQ+ bar. We don’t want our documentary to come off as an advertisement goading the audience to attend the spaces we represent. Rather, we should aim to invoke in our audience how the patrons and owners of these spaces feel when they attend them. This way, it might act as a more convincing way to motivate our target audience to support our impact goal.

Overall, I believe that Wildness (2012) has given tremendous insight in how my group should go about conducting ourselves ethically, and that The Winterkeeper (2023) has provided inspiration on how our storyline could be presented.

(927 words)

References:

Nichols B (2017) Introduction to documentary, third edition, Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 43-109

Oishi (2015) ‘Reading Realness: Paris Is Burning, Wildness, and Queer and Transgender Documentary Practice’, The Blackwell Companion to Documentary Cinema, 253-262

Ruby J (2005) New Challenges for Documentary: The Ethics of Image Making, Manchester: Manchester University Press, 211-212.

The Guardian (2023) The Winterkeeper [documentary], The Guardian, United Kingdom https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2023/dec/06/the-winterkeeper-steven-fuller-yellowstone-national-park

Tsang W (2012) Wildness [documentary], United States of America https://vimeo.com/404104779

The following will outline my initial ideas for an impact documentary.

Synopsis

This documentary will focus on the National Tertiary Education Union’s (NTEU) fight for a better and fairer Enterprise Agreement for RMIT’s Vocational Education staff. It will follow the NTEU’s strikes on the RMIT campus, and highlight the personal struggles experienced by staff who are not receiving fair wages and a healthy work environment. It will also feature interviews with experts in the field to inspire the audience to help in the ways that they can.

Outreach Overview:
The goal of the documentary is to inspire its primary audience, the students of RMIT, to join the staff in solidarity to bargain for better wages from the institution. The larger goal will be to accomplish actual material changes and help staff obtain the benefits that they are due.

The Political Context:
Exploitation of workers in jobs of passion is incredibly normalized. There is also often a lack of understanding by those who are financially fortunate on how much these workers suffer due to this exploitation.

The key players that are involved within this context are:

• RMIT Vice Chancellor Alec Cameron
• NTEU Branch President – Tricia McLaughlin
• NTEU Division Organizer – Rifai Abdul
• NTEU Division Organizer – Aimee Hulbert

Goals

1. Raise awareness of the unfair work conditions of RMIT VE staff to RMIT students
2. Convince students that the unfair conditions affect their education quality as well, due to lack of available resources given to staff.
3. Advise students who want to contribute to the NTEU on ways they can contribute to the union.
4. Raise funds for the union and pressure the university.
5. Achieve a fair enterprise agreement for RMIT VE staff.

Audiences:

• Base Audience – RMIT students, Educational Staff that are not in the union
• Beyond core audience – Prospective students of RMIT, Students/staff of other universities
• How to engage with them – Garner sympathy with the documentary, pamphlets in class/pdfs on canvas to ask for solidarity and ways to support the union.

Key Messages:

1. RMIT staff are not being paid fairly, your tuition fees are being pocketed by executives who play no part and have no care for your education.
2. From a moral standpoint, we should demand workers be paid their fair share.
3. If a fair Enterprise Agreement is agreed upon, staff will be better equipped to provide students with the help and guidance they deserve.
4. Donate to the union fund if you are able to, and pressure the university on all avenues (Course surveys, strikes etc)

Partners:

• NTEU RMIT Branch members
• Student run organizations in support of NTEU (Socialist Alternative club?)

Connecting audiences to the campaign:

1. Audience Journeys: Go to the NTEU website to learn more, Participate in the NTEU strikes, Sign a petition from students, Donate to the NTEU fund
2. Deeper Engagement: Hosting Events in support of NTEU from the students on campus
3. How News/Content will be distributed: Social Media (Reels/TikToks), Pamphlets on campus, PDF flyers on canvas/e-mail, NTEU Website