Self-Criticism:

In order to evaluate the final product I will return first to the purposes and goals of the project, then to the technical and aesthetic norms of the genre I’ve chosen to work in.

In my original Introduction and Topic Summary, I stated my intent to create empathy and understanding toward this condition. Based on questionnaires that I’ll analyze in more depth in the Evaluation Research Report section, I believe I have accomplished that goal. I believe the audiences took the topic seriously and a number of people have spoken to me about how this issue has affected their lives after seeing the video.

A number of ideas for this piece were presented in the original Theoretical Statement and Research, primarily aimed at dealing with ethical issues intrinsic either to this topic and situation or to the documentary form, via the reflexive mode. Beginning with Bill Nichols’ contention that the reflexive documentary rarely reflects on ethical issues as a primary concern, but rather on difficulties or consequences of representation, strategies are explored to reflect on ethical issues. I don’t think the final piece accomplishes the reflection on ethics that the rough cut did, but it could be simply a matter of putting a clip back in that verbalizes my father’s inability to speak for himself.

Of the Reflexive strategies discussed I believe only Interactivity as a subcategory of Formal Reflexivity was utilized extensively in the final work, and I do conclude in my Theoretical Statement and Research that Interactivity is the crux of addressing ethical and representational issues in this work. I think that appearing in the movie and being interviewed did position me both as the maker of the work and as an equal to the other participants, but I couldn’t say for sure that it didn’t position me as an authority more than the other characters. My voice is heard asking questions to other participants, and this technique also positions me as the maker of the work. I wonder if it hasn’t become an accepted convention to the point where it no longer accomplishes deconstructive or stylistic reflexivity. An instance of Stylistic Reflexivity occurs when Jessica is shown holding the camera and talking to her Dad.

Political Reflexivity is also accomplished through the interactive style and through allowing myself to be scrutinized. While I did shoot some experimental group interviews in an attempt to “blur the boundaries between self and other” not much of that footage was used. The interviews with my mother address this concept more than any of the others utilized, as I (and my production book) are in the frame with her. The strongest instance of embodied knowledge I believe is the portrayal of my own discoveries throughout the process. I begin with one reason to scrutinize the subject, having lived with my father, and I end with other reasons, stemming from the discovery that I may one day suffer as he did.

I suggested a collage style to create a structural reflexivity. This was employed in the animated collage, in the collage look of the journal, and in the music, but I think it could be more powerful if it employed the video making process, which is feasible with the existing footage but would need to be more carefully thought out so as not to be superfluous. This could also address the originally proposed fetishizing of hoarded objects and video making tools.

The concept of undifferentiated engagement remains difficult. I believe I approached the project with undifferentiated engagement, probably more due to my proclivity to hoard than to any political action. I think any undifferentiated engagement in the video making process did not succeed in causing the viewer to experience undifferentiated engagement. So that probably needs to be dealt with in terms of raising consciousness about the issue. In the end, undifferentiated engagement turns out to be a bad thing according to the goals of my project, which is to discourage that kind of behavior in hoarders.

While I think the important goals of telling the story and creating empathy and pressing for social change are accomplished, I think some of the reflexive elements tend toward a tokenism at this stage. The general style of the piece is relatively conventional, reflecting Errol Morris’ voice Interactivity, Ken Burns’ use of stills and telling of history, and Frontline’s presentation of an issue. While my interest in more experimental strategies remains, if the overall goal of the piece is to raise social awareness, I think the work accomplishes that in its present form. This form follows mainstream documentary conventions as much as a personal documentary can, and will probably be more accessible as a result.