Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Documentary film theories attempt to accomplish several goals, which include defining the genre of documentary film, articulating its components, and describing its effects and use in society. This entry explores the various definitions of documentary film, the evolving set of documentary filmic components and practices, and how the definitions and construction of documentary films inform documentary film theories. These issues are particularly relevant for the field of communication and rhetoric because most documentary films engage in various forms of persuasion.

Definitions of Documentary

The term documentary was coined in 1926 by British filmmaker John Grierson in his review of Robert Flaherty's film Moana. Grierson described the film as visually capturing the daily life of young Polynesians. In the 1930s, Grierson became a documentary filmmaker and producer, and he expanded his definition of documentary film to the “creative treatment of actuality,” which was largely uncontested until the early 1960s. Erik Barnouw, who wrote one of the most popular books on documentary film history, Documentary: A History of the Non-Fiction Film, defines this genre by the films' place in history and societal use. Barnouw distinguishes documentaries from earlier nonfiction films (which were known as travelogues) by their incorporation of a narrative structure and use of multiple close-ups. The use of narrative and close-ups came directly from the influence of fiction film, and one result of their use was a clearer manifestation of the filmmaker's point of view.

One of the tensions that concerns definitions and theories of documentary film is grounded in claims of neutral representation. The film Nanook of the North, directed by Robert Flaherty, is generally regarded as one of the first documentaries even though the film is critiqued for its romanticized portrayal of Inuit life and its use of historic recreations. Flaherty's first attempt to depict Inuit life resembled a travelogue (with which he was not happy), and it was destroyed in a fire. He returned to northern Canada determined to create an empathetic depiction of the rapidly disappearing Inuit culture. He decided to focus the film on the life of Nanook and his family in order to more fully engage audiences with their plight and daily struggle for existence. Despite the film's questionable depictions of authentic Inuit life (many scenes were staged), Nanook of the North retains its position in documentary film history.

Documentary Practices

Many early documentary film practitioners were primarily interested in making their films persuasive, and they incorporated additional narrative components into their films. Robert Flaherty (father of British documentary), John Grierson (father of American documentary), Dziga Vertov (father of Soviet experimental documentary): all were attracted to what we have come to recognize as a documentary form; however, there was not the concomitant understanding that their films were to be “objective.” A prominent critic of voice-over narration was Leni Riefenstahl, the director of Triumph of Will, who believed that her images were more persuasive without an omniscient narrator telling the audience how to interpret her films' images. Although early documentaries clearly embraced nonneutral representation, there was criticism of this approach. Luis Buhuel's 1932 film, Land Without Bread, illustrated the inherent biases in the documentary film form by clearly staging scenes and having the film's narrator criticize the film's characters.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading