Are documentaries an unreliable source of past events?
Does manipulation play a big part within documentaries?
Does 'Searching for Sugar Man' lean more towards a Verite film or a manipulative film?
One could say that the statement ‘documentaries are unreliable narrators of past events’ is accurate when applied to ‘Searching for Sugar Man’ as Bendjelloul is reconstituting the myth, through the use of metaphors and the implications of Nichols’ Reflexive Mode. On the contrary, one could say the documentary enhances cinema verité as it repeatedly demonstrates realism through its cinematography (hand-held and fly on the wall shots) and its wide array of stock footage overall elevating the audience’s immersion experience.
The documentary opens on a wide angle, establishing shot showing a car driving along a sunbathed road. This scene initially goes against the above statement as Bendjelloul uses Rodriguez’s song ‘Sugarman’ (1970) to allow the audience to grasp the documentary’s topic, the musician Rodriguez. This is supported through his use of multiple diegesis (Wollen) as we see the song go from non-diegetic to diegetic highlighting the realism of the scene and increasing the immersion experience. On a different level, it could be said that this scene is used to form an allegiance between Segerman and the audience through the trusting atmosphere induced through the high key lighting and state of equilibrium. This sets up the theme of a journey as the spectator witnesses a car traveling along a road, with Segerman inside. On the other hand, one could say that Bendjelloul manipulates the audience into trusting Segerman so that they become more gullible when he proclaims that Rodriguez is supposedly dead. When this is revealed to the audience, Bendjelloul immediately diverts the audience’s attention to creating myth and ambiguity by introducing a heightened level of enigmas, created using more grotesque aesthetics. He supports Todorov’s narrative theory by creating a state of dis-equilibrium, suggesting that the sequence is constructed, taking away the realistic effect. In support of this, Susan Sontag said that ‘reality has been constructed to serve the image’ suggesting that the aesthetic design is dictating how the narrative evolves, in turn implying that the statement suggesting an ‘unreliable narrative’ is correct.
Bendjelloul proceeds to emphasise the disequilibrium by juxtaposing the next establishing shot of Detroit with the opening as it is shown as being dark and negative. This is supported by his use of pathetic fallacy, the rain suggesting the city is mourning the “death” of Rodriguez. Determining the statement, Bendjelloul demonstrates Nichol’s ‘poetic mode’ through the use of animation which in turn goes against the question. The use of animation engages the audience through a different technique in order for them to become more familiar with the character of Rodriguez. On the other hand, this could highlight an unreliable narrative as it represents an on-screen metaphor of the boundaries between facts and myth therefore not showing Rodriguez for who he is. Following this, the spectator sees a re-enactment of Rodriguez in a pub. This goes against the statement as it’s coming from a first-hand account of Dennis Coffrey and mirrors what he says about the night in question. However, one could say this supports the statement as Bendjelloul could have easily manipulated the surroundings (more mist or noise) to develop more enigmas for the audience (e.g. what does this misted figure look like?) and aid in creating an ‘urban myth-like air’ (www.alexandersemanda.wordpress.com) that the documentary hopes to bring across. This could be developed to say that the talking-head interviews from Coffrey and DiMaggio are scripted meaning what they say is unreliable and all part of the effort in making the myth of the Sugarman.
The next narrative set piece that goes against the statement, is of Steve Rowland in Palm Springs. Bendjelloul uses this scene to enhance the technique of cinema verité as it opens on a hand-held camera which then progresses to a point of view, tracking shot into Rowland’s house. Allowing the scene to have a feeling of spontaneity and unpredictably as the audience feel as if it isn’t staged. Like many other films, this would have been influenced by Pennebaker’s ‘Don’t Look Back’ (1967) which heavily focuses on the truth in cinema through hand-held camera and audience privileged scenes. The idea of spontaneity is supported by Bendjelloul’s use of the ‘fly on the wall’ as it allows the audience to become more immersed and enhances this sense of privilege. This in turn allows the audience to become more invested in the “journey” that they have embarked on at the beginning of the documentary. Bendjelloul continues to demonstrate a more reliable narrative through his use of the ‘Kem Burns effect’. By showing three still dissolves of stock photos, it adds to the overall realism aspect and induces a greater emotional response towards Rodriguez himself. On the other hand, certain areas of the scene result in creating a more manipulative, unreliable narrative. In support of this, throughout the interview (at which Rowland is looking across from the camera) the audience is able to see clear narrative construction when he answers the questions and the convenient placement of the photos and records. For example, he says “he’s more like a wise man, a profit, and way beyond being a musical artist”, which demonstrates the myth-making purpose behind the interview and Rowland’s role in the story. Moreover, in this scene Bendjelloul purposefully withholds information about Rodriguez in order to aid the myth and patchwork of enigmas that has been collected, using Nichols’ ‘reflexive mode’ suggests the narrative has been manipulated to fit the will of the director therefore supporting the idea that it’s unreliable. This is supported by the opinion that Bendjelloul is ‘guilt of the sin of omission’ (Bradshaw) as he chooses to withhold certain information.
The next talking-head interview with Clarence Avant continues to demonstrate an unreliable narrative in the sense that Avant himself is being manipulated. At this point in the documentary, you could apply the characters to Propp’s character types with Avant being ‘the villain’. To achieve this goal, Bendjelloul used low key lighting, confrontational questions and responses and a deeply toned, ominous score which all contrast the previous interviews. On the other hand, some cinema verité is also shown in the interview. Like ‘Don’t Look Back’, you’re able to hear the interviewer asking the question and witness Avant lean forward, disrupting the shot. This gives the scene a sense of unpredictability, making the people’s actions and responses more naturalistic. Consequently, one could say that Bendjelloul only leaves in these aspects of verité to mask the clearly manipulated character of Clarence Avant so that the feeling of spontaneity is then reflected onto the interview.
Another narrative set piece that can be applied to the question is the montage of landscape shots showing flocks of birds and beaches. Playing towards the narrative structure, this scene represents a high point in the second act as the audience have just learnt that Rodriguez is alive. Concerning the statement, due to the heavy amount of metaphorical interpretation this set piece supports the idea of it being manipulated. Bendjelloul uses high key, expressionistic lighting and bird imagery to present the landscape as a metaphor for heaven and a sense of weightlessness. Riefenstahl’s ‘Triumph of Will’ (1935) shares this approach in its opening as you see a plane flying through the clouds. Riefenstahl used this as propaganda for the Nazi party, resulting in it being very heavily manipulated with its inclusion of metaphorical attributes on its aesthetic design. As one can make links between these two documentaries, it suggests that ‘Searching for Sugarman’ is also manipulating its audience. This is supported by the fact that Rodriguez was touring in Australia which Bendjelloul purposefully left out to maintain his ‘aura of mystery’ (www.sensanostra.com).
On the other hand, the following scene (when Rodriguez is revealed) supports cinema verité more than the idea of manipulation. The audience witness Rodriguez prepare for his interview by asking for some water and talking to others in the room. This fly on the wall approach adds to the process of humanisation deflating the built-up myth, even though it’s attempted to be maintained through the re-occurring motif of his glasses. Furthermore, like Avant leaning forward, Rodriguez continues to disrupt his mic; resulting in the classic interview set-up being ruined, creating a sense of spontaneity. The film then progresses to mirror the animation shown earlier but with a tracking shot of the actual Rodriguez, suggesting that the myth has been lifted. In a way this brings across Herzog’s ‘Ecstatic Truth’ as the audience are able to witness the anti-climactic product of their stylization, imagination and fabrication and the myth that they have created, and invested their allegiance in, for the entire film. Finally, Bendjelloul purposefully ends with Rodriguez walking from the left to the right to demonstrate that the journey’s over and equilibrium has been restored (Todorov).
Overall, I think that ‘Searching for Sugarman’ does contain more of an unreliable narrative than a reliable one. Due to the possible influence of Riefenstahl’s ‘Triumph of Will’, the documentary carries a lot of metaphorical interpretations with the heavenly imagery and repeated themes of a journey. Furthermore, one could appropriately say that the narrative is structured to follow Todorov’s narrative theory and not the way that the events in question played out. Even though the film contained aspects of cinema verité, with the hand-held cameras and spontaneous attributes, Bendjelloul could have purposefully used these aspects to mask the blatant manipulation of interviews and similarities to Nichol’s ‘reflexive mode’. In conclusion, I would say that the preferred reading would be that “you shouldn’t compromise your artistic integrity for fame and fortune” which the documentary brings across successfully. One could say that, by having this predominant message successfully brought across, the method of an ‘unreliable narrative’ is also successful for securing an audiences preferred reading.
Comments