Unexpectedly personal
Making my documentary has been an unexpectedly personal experience. I initially chose to explore the Melbourne Jewish community because I had connections within it and knew I would be welcomed. But once I began to interview my subjects, I realised there is so much to this community that I didn’t know about. I had no idea how multi-faceted and diverse it is. I must admit that before I undertook the project I was one of those people who judged the Jewish community as insular from the outside without really knowing it properly or knowing why it has a tendency to be enclosed. There is still a lot I don’t know or understand about this community because I haven’t had a Jewish education. But what I do understand is that there is more to it than meets the eye. For such a small community, this is surprising.
At first, I completely dismissed the thought of making myself a part of the documentary. But as I progressed into production, I started to change my mind. I realised it wouldn’t make sense to omit my presence from the doco because it was implicitly always going to be there, in the interviews and at my family dinner. And it felt natural too. One night I went to my grandparents’ house for dinner and brought the camera along in case I felt like capturing some of my grandma’s old photos while I was there. I didn’t expect that I would end up filming us looking at the photos together, an experience that has a small presence in the finished product but that, for me, was the most personal experience in the whole making of the project. I learned that my grandma’s grandfather was deeply religious, and that her stepfather’s whole family died in the war, things I would not have otherwise found out. This particular experience of looking through photographs from my grandmother’s childhood, my dad’s childhood and my own childhood made me feel a real sense of connection to my family history and to Judaism. As Jenny pointed out, my own participation also makes the film more interesting because it adds an element of the personal.
From the beginning, I knew the issue of intermarriage in the Jewish community was something I wanted to address in my documentary because it has affected my family in the past. But I think it was something I was also a little apprehensive to address because it’s a sensitive topic and because I was unsure of what my family’s reaction would be. Due to this, I didn’t go into each interview with questions on the matter. Interestingly, however, discussion about intermarriage just seemed to emerge – every one of my subjects brought it up. So it actually ended up having a large presence in my documentary. I think I could omit the final section on intermarriage and the doco would be saying pretty much the same thing as it already does. But I’ve kept it in because it is important to me. This is another way the film is quite personal.
Perhaps most rewarding for me is the fact that my making of this documentary has sparked a lot of discussion, even some angered debates about being a Jewish person in those around me. For one, it has created conversation in my household about what it means to be a Jew living in Melbourne today. I have learned more about my dad’s childhood and Jewish education, something he doesn’t often bring up. I’ve also been the unwitting instigator of several arguments between my friends about certain Jewish mentalities. It’s quite fascinating to see how Judaism seems to affect almost everyone around me. Even non-Jewish friends of mine have a lot to say about it. It’s surprisingly fulfilling to be able to get people thinking about particular issues within the Melbourne Jewish community, and to see that the things that I find intriguing and important are also things those close to me find important. It has been quite a journey finding out about this community and to realise that even though I’m not Jewish, I still have a connection to Judaism and its values.
A big confidence boost
Having just emerged from the long process of making my documentary, I feel more confident about a few things. As someone who used to be painfully shy, calling strangers to request things from them is something that still makes me apprehensive. I was lucky enough to know Bec, Liraz and Leslie personally, so I felt completely comfortable talking to them. But for Naomi and Sonya, for permission to capture the parade footage, and for my failed attempt to get permission to film at Jewish schools Mt Scopus and Sholem Aleichem, I had to take a deep breath and make some phone calls. I think my apprehension was exacerbated by the fact that the Jewish community in Melbourne is very security-conscious, so any media attention would be treated with caution, particularly if it was to be published online. Having said that, though, everyone I did speak to was absolutely lovely and supportive of my project, even if they couldn’t help me with it. So I am feeling much more comfortable about putting myself out there and contacting people. My interviewing skills have also vastly improved, which I make note of in this post.
Before undertaking my documentary, I didn’t have too much experience with Final Cut Pro. I’m usually the one who sits in the chair next to the editor shouting out ideas and orders. I swear I’d make a good boss. I knew I had enough knowledge of the program to edit my project, but that I’d have to enlist the help of my good friend and ex-Media kid Karin, who’s amazingly savvy with it, for the more technical stuff. I was surprised to find, however, that I actually have some semblance of intuition when it comes to editing. I suppose this comes from watching countless films and docos and taking note of the way the footage is put together. I’ve had a lot of comments from friends and family commending me on the professionalism of my editing. This, along with Karin’s invaluable assistance, has made me realise that I do have decent editing skills and I should embrace them. This sounds like a trivial thing, but it’s been an important realisation for me.
Documentary presentations
It was with relief that I presented my finished documentary in class today. It was well-received and I think everyone seemed to grasp what my intentions were. There were some other good quality works too. I really enjoyed James‘ observational, almost experimental in parts, documentary on the Food Not Bombs volunteer movement that feeds the homeless once a week in Fitzroy. The interview with the young homeless kid was quite poignant and eye-opening, a definite highlight in his film. Aaron‘s documentary on road rage was also surprisingly moving for its theme, which I think was achieved by the emotive music that played the whole time, as well as his concerned approach to the growing violence in society in general, of which road rage is just a symptom. Aaron was the only student who addressed the theory explicitly. I thought the way he did it was cool because it gave Tonnies’ notion of community versus society a place in contemporary culture. I also found Nisa’s documentary on Melbourne’s rollerblading subculture really fun. It was extremely visually engaging; I could’ve kept watching her first video with the observational footage of the rollerbladers for ages. The young rollerblader in her second video was a great talent and added a real sense of light-heartedness to the whole project. I liked the way she dealt with the notion of delinquency in the last video, with her discussion on the government’s implementation of skate-stoppers on sidewalks. It looked like everyone had put a lot of thought and effort into their projects and I was impressed all round.
The Jewish Bond
The Jewish Bond (dir. Jasmine Roth 2010; Australia)
Above is my finished documentary, produced in response to my Documentary Learning Contract. Hooray! And the spiel that goes with it:
Directed, produced and edited by RMIT University Honours student Jasmine Roth, The Jewish Bond is a short documentary that explores a variety of issues in the Jewish community of Melbourne, Australia in 2010.
To view the documentary fullscreen, click here for The Jewish Bond – Part 1 and The Jewish Bond – Part 2 on YouTube.
Almost fine
In today’s class, I presented my documentary rough cut to a whole two people: Jenny and a student from a previous class who offered to stay and give me feedback. They both thought the topics I am exploring – the insular nature of the Jewish community, Zionist and non-Zionist views, secularism and tradition as opposed to being religious, and the issue of intermarriage – are very interesting, and my interview subjects are also highly engaging. The only big suggestion Jenny had was to make more explicit exactly what it is I’m addressing in my documentary. I need to do so at the very start, as my current introduction lacks a clear direction or argument. I was a little defensive of this at first, and tried to explain my reasons for having an ambiguous beginning. But this is one of the problems with actively participating in a documentary story; you can become too close to it and struggle to take criticism. I can see that Jenny is right, though. In taking up her suggestion, my audience will have some context, and, most importantly, will know why I’m presenting the material I’m presenting. In addition, I could also create a few more segue ways using the observational footage from the parade and my family dinner, just to break up the talking heads a bit more. They do, however, make up the basis of my argument. Otherwise, Jenny seemed pretty happy with what I’ve done. I’m glad to say I’m pretty close to producing a fine cut.
A Grizzly doco
Grizzly Man (dir. Werner Herzog 2005; USA) is one of my favourite documentaries. Based on the life of Timothy Treadwell and his dedication to grizzly bears, this film utilizes footage from Treadwell’s long stays in Alaska during the summer, exposing bit by bit his decline into paranoia and mental instability before he and his girlfriend Amie Huguenard were eventually attacked and killed by a mean grizzly in 2003. Disturbingly, Treadwell’s video camera was recording during the fatal attack. The lens cap was still attached so there are thankfully no visuals, but the audio is all there.
The most memorable part of this film for me is the scene in which Herzog visits one of Treadwell’s ex-girlfriends and best friend Jewel Palovak. With the camera behind him and framed on Palovak’s face, Herzog sits opposite her whilst listening to the audio of Treadwell’s and Huguenard’s deaths through headphones. We cannot see his face, but he must appear clearly distressed as Palovak begins to cry uncontrollably. When he removes the headphones, he tells her never to listen to the audio and to in fact destroy it immediately. I remember watching this scene on the news when the film was released and being utterly disturbed by it. Who knows why Herzog wanted to listen to the audio. Perhaps he felt it would give him a better understanding of Treadwell’s final moments. Perhaps it was done for dramatic effect. Perhaps he didn’t even listen to it at all. How are we to know? Whatever the reason, I still love this doco and recommended it to anyone who is fascinated by Treadwell’s story, or who is a fan of Werner Herzog.
Today, I made an old lady cry
Today was my very last interview for the Jewish community documentary. My subject was a volunteer at The Jewish Museum of Australia. She spoke very knowledgeably about the museum, saying that it played an important role in the Melbourne Jewish community because it not only gives people a place to store their treasures, it also teaches wider society about the community. In her opinion, Australian Jews are often seen as “peculiar” by wider society, especially religious Jews who walk around in their cloaks and kippahs. But this is just a matter of them being misunderstood. This is why the museum is important, because it educates non-Jews about what may otherwise appear to be a “peculiar” community.
When I asked my subject what being Jewish means to her, she began to get a little teary. Inside, I was mortified. I instantly doubted my questions: perhaps I don’t have the right or authority to ask people about their identities, about experiences such as the Holocaust that affected Jews in ways I could never imagine. I know emotion makes for great conflict in a documentary, but how can you feel triumphant when you’ve just upset someone? I tried to maintain an air of professionalism whilst being compassionate – not an easy task. I asked her if she’d like to stop and she nodded. I’m glad I didn’t dismiss her answering the question altogether because she quickly recovered and was able to do so. It was quite an experience, strangely intimate although we are perfect strangers. I guess it demonstrates the kind of ethical responsibilities you shoulder in the media world, especially if you are a journalist working with real people and events. I think I handled the situation well and with delicacy. Making this documentary has really improved my interviewing skills due to challenges such as this one.
The next challenge
Now that I have almost all of my footage, with only my interview with the Jewish Museum scheduled for next week left, it’s time to get cracking on post-production. Editing has never been my strong point, so I’m a little apprehensive about how my final product will turn out, especially as I have accumulated so much footage. I wish I had a storyboard to follow, but unfortunately that isn’t possible with documentary, as basically have to construct your entire film in the editing room. I had a chat to Jenny in class on Friday and she said that, because I will have five different interviews to work with by next week, it could become a bit of a talking-heads film. Which is not what I want to achieve. To avoid this, I will have to be absolutely brutal in what interview content I do and don’t include, and will attempt to pace the film in a way that isn’t cutting directly from one subject to the next, to the next, and so on. Thankfully, I have the observational material from my family dinner on Pesach, my grandmother showing me photos from her past, and the Jewish parade I filmed on the weekend. This material will hopefully will serve as nice segue ways between my exploration of the conflict between the Jewish community and wider society, and the conflict within the society itself, in terms of the different ideologies by which Jewish people live. Jenny also said she’s looking forward to seeing how I inject the personal and participatory element into my documentary, through the use of the dinner, the photos with my grandmother and my onscreen engagement with Bec Shonberg (SKIF) and Liraz (Zionist Youth Council) as they show me around their respective youth movements’ headquarters.
If I keep the structure of the documentary fairly straightforward, the editing process should not be too complicated. I want to start off with a discussion of how, in some ways, the Jewish community sets itself apart from wider society. This is a theme that runs through Bec’s, Liraz’s and Leslie’s interviews, in their views on intermarriage. Then I’ll create some kind of segue way into an exploration of the conflict within the community itself. This conflict will be best represented in contrasting Bec’s and Liraz’s interviews, as they sport opposing ideologies about what it means to be Jewish, Liraz being a Zionist and Bec being someone who prefers to focus on the global Jewish community, rather than on the importance of Israel alone. I ultimately want to conclude the film in a harmonious way; a way shows these conflicts are present as a result of the diversity of Melbourne’s Jewish community. I have to be as sensitive as possible in dealing with negative representations of the community, due to the fact that it is highly security conscious, and also that I am dealing with people I know personally and care for. Most of my interview subjects have expressed that the community is still quite close in spite of these tensions, so I shouldn’t have trouble constructing this conclusion. It will also be a nice way to reiterate the idea that the Jewish community exists, in some ways, separate to wider society.
