Documentary Studies: An Analysis of Filmmakers' Definitions

This essay explores the definitions of documentary film by prominent filmmakers like Robert Flaherty and John Grierson, highlighting their perspectives, strengths, and limitations. Flaherty focused on 'films of discovery and revelation,' emphasizing capturing authentic lifestyles, while Grierson defined documentary as 'the creative treatment of actuality,' prioritizing editing and analytical treatment. The essay also touches upon Paul Rotha's approach, which prioritized visual appeal, and argues for a balance between creative treatment and factual accuracy. Ultimately, the essay emphasizes the importance of both actuality and social impact in documentary filmmaking, suggesting that the ideals of Flaherty and Grierson should be combined to create impactful and meaningful documentaries. Desklib provides access to similar essays and resources for students.

Running head: DOCUMENTARY STUDIES
DOCUMENTARY STUDIES
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author Note:

1DOCUMENTARY STUDIES
The word documentary has its roots in the word document which meant “a lesson; an
admonition; a warning”. There are three basic creative modes of films which are narrative
fiction, experimental or avant-garde and finally documentary. Narrative fiction is known to
be a feature-length entertainment that we generally watch in theatres or on our television
screens. The nontheatrical films societies work towards making films of individual
filmmakers which are invested in visual arts. Such films come under the category of
experimental or avant-garde films. This paper discussion how the documentary filmmakers
have defined the word documentary according to their perspectives and viewpoints. It further
discusses about the strengths and imitations of this definitions respect to some of the
documentary films made by them.
The characteristics of a documentary are somewhat similar to that of the films,
especially the fiction films. The characteristics are subjects, forms, purpose or point of view,
production methods and techniques and the impact it has on the audiences. The journey of the
English-language documentary started off with Robert Flaherty’s Nanook of the North, which
was shot in Canada and the film was released in the United States in the year of 1922
(Mackay 2017). This movie showed the Eskimos which he had gotten to know personally on
his journey back home. For this he is often called the father of documentary. The film won
hearts of millions of film lovers who appreciated it because of the freshness and simplicity it
had brought into this new genre of films. Flaherty’s definition of film making was more
concentrated on the camera rather than on the editing bench. He believed that editing was not
a creative act in filmmaking. When he made silent films, Flaherty took long running takes
and put them together to present a continuous view of the important actions in the movie.
However he lacked the concept of sound editing hence had to depend on others to help him
edit sound films (Quick, Gadzekpo and Goodwin 2017).

2DOCUMENTARY STUDIES
For Flaherty documentary was more of a “film of discovery and revelation”, like the
way his wife, Frances Flaherty had chosen to define it while she was helping her husband to
create a new genre of films. His belief in discovery and revelation being the basics of
documentary film making was portrayed in his films. In Nanook of the North, the film solely
was focussed on the lives of the Eskimos (Mackay 2017). Same treatment was seen in his
other films like Moana and Man of Aran. He tried to capture the lifestyles of the people who
were influenced by the western industrialized civilization. These were the strengths of Robert
Flaherty’s definition of documentary. However there were certain weakness since he failed in
creative treatment of his films. Like in Nanook of the North, there was no sophistication, only
one camera, no lights and freezing climate. However there was an authenticity to it has none
of the scenes were staged.
Robert Flaherty’s second film Moana which released in 1926, intrigued John Grierson
who at that time was visiting United States to devise a use for the word documentary. The
term “documentary” was first coined by John Grierson (Stollery 2017. For him documentary
meant an evolving concept, which can be related which the actions of people like what they
are doing and what are they going to do in the future. Grierson believed that documentary
what kind of art which gave a natural material to the film sequence. The word was carried all
the way to Great Britain by Grierson along with his newly developed aesthetic theory and
sense of social purpose in the context of documentary films. His first film was Drifters in the
year 1929 which succeeded in advancing to full status (Aitken 2013).
Critics of Grierson claimed that he deserted the aesthetes of pure form of
documentary and his writings which were prolific had deep commitment to the creative
representation of the cinema. Inspite of this Grierson managed to propel documentary into the
international arena. Grierson in his film Drifters told the story of Britain’s North Sea herring
fishery (Smith and Rock 2014). The film was described to be in context with modern films

3DOCUMENTARY STUDIES
like a response to avant-garde films. The film also highlighted the fact that Grierson was not
afraid to voice his visions through the films he made. Similar treatment was seen in the film
Granton Trawler which was the only film that was directed by John Grierson himself. The
film was about the fishing trawler the "Isabella Grieg" that travelled from Granton Harbour to
through the east coast of Edinburgh, then to the fishing grounds between Shetland and
Norway (Stollery 2017).
John Grierson chose to define documentary as "the creative treatment of actuality
unlike Flaherty who although accepted the implication of creativity and actuality, but their
methods of treatment of the ideas differed (Chapman 2015). Grierson was mostly invested on
editing and giving the film an analytical treatment. Robert Flaherty on the other hand did not
believed in editing and focussed mostly on shooting of the film. Therefore the documentary
genre always had differences between the ideas of shooters and cutters, the Flahertyites and
the Griersonites.
From the definition of these famous documentary filmmakers, it is understood that
both define the concept in two different ways. Although that agreed on the fact that actuality
was the basic fundamental of the subject of documentary, however there were vast
differences I the techniques both used for recording and the presenting the film in front of the
audiences. Grierson way of film shooting allowed others to shoot small footages which all
were put together to be made into a Grierson documentary, while on the other hand Flaherty
shot the film completely controlled the shooting of his own film. Not only was it based on the
filmmaking methods but also it had its epicentre around the purposes, the effects and the
functions of the documentary (Cowie 2018).
Apart from Flaherty and Grierson there were other contemporary documentary
filmmakers like Paul Rotha who was also a historian of the British movement. In the films

4DOCUMENTARY STUDIES
made by Rotha, there was again a creative treatment of actuality although it did not seem to
be quite catchy at its first appearance. He used his films as a medium to analyse creatively the
social lives of the common people as is present in the reality but provided no space to
actuality (Boon 2016). This was the drawback in Rotha’s films. In fact, Rotha focused more
in satisfying the visual desire of the audiences hence did not exclude the use of studios and
actors for making the film since it helped to make the film more desirable for the audiences.
The strongest definition of documentary can be given by the phrase ‘the creative
treatment of actuality’. The filmmakers must invest in current researches to understand the
creativity to produce contexts (Forceville 2017). According to Grierson, we have seen
creativity as systemic, collaborative and a staged process. This processes should be based on
evidence-based research on the topic. If there is a continuation in following the concepts of
romanticism and mythical treatments then there will be a loss in the rich possibilities that
could have been incorporated by the filmmakers in their presentation of the film. However
creative treatment can be incorporated in film making if it is legitimately used. Therefore
documentary should be a form of art which acts as a link between creativity and documentary
practise. This projects the definition provided by John Grierson regarding documentary films
as one of the best definitions possible.
In order to frame a definition according to my perception of the genre of
documentary, more weightage was given to the concept of actuality of materials in
comparison to the impact it has on the audience. The idea that is common with all of the
documentary filmmakers that they want to record actuality. Similarly, from my viewpoint this
should be of prime focus. The ideals of Flaherty and Grierson differed on the arena that
Flaherty wanted to make the world a better place to live in using his works and Grierson
aimed at making individuals into better citizens for the betterment of the society. In my
opinion both the objectives should be pondered upon while making a documentary as the

5DOCUMENTARY STUDIES
ideas are interrelated and documentaries act as great platforms for spreading the word of
humanity and social motives.
In conclusion it can be stated that different filmmakers have different perceptions
regarding the film they are making. Each have their unique styles and treatment methods of
the subjects of the movie. However all consider the baseline of documentary as to be the
narration of actuality. Care should also be given to the impact which these films have on the
audience and on the society as most of the documentary films makers thrive to make films
which will make the world a better place to live in. The paper showed differences between
the film making pattern of Flaherty and Grierson. While one focussed on shooting the other
was more invested in editing although for both the filmmakers the fundamentals remains
same, the portrayal of actual facts through their movies.

6DOCUMENTARY STUDIES
References
Aitken, I., 2013. Film and reform: John Grierson and the documentary film movement.
Routledge.
Mackay, R., 2017. Nanook of the North: All the World’sa Stage. Queen's Quarterly, 124(2),
p.248.
Stollery, M., 2017. John Grierson’s ‘First principles’ as origin and beginning: the emergence
of the documentary tradition in the field of nonfiction film. Screen, 58(3), pp.309-331.
Davison, A., 2017. Listening to Prestige British Industrial Films. The Routledge Companion
to Screen Music and Sound, p.213.
Cowie, E., 2018. Working Images: the representations of documentary film. In Work and the
Image: v. 2: Work in Modern Times-Visual Mediations and Social Processes (pp. 185-204).
Routledge.
Nichols, B., 2017. Introduction to documentary. Indiana University Press.
Quick, R., Gadzekpo, E. and Goodwin, M., 2017. Through the Lens of Realism: The
Documentary Genre.
Smith, N. and Rock, J., 2014. Documentary as a statement: defining old genre in a new
age. Journal of Media Practice, 15(1), pp.58-62.
Boon, T., 2016. ‘To formulate a plan for better living’: Visual communication and scientific
planning in Paul Rotha’s documentary films, 1935–45. In Pursuing the Unity of Science(pp.
156-181). Routledge.

7DOCUMENTARY STUDIES
Forceville, C., 2017. Interactive documentary and its limited opportunities to
persuade. Discourse, Context & Media, 20, pp.218-226.
Chapman, J., 2015. Documentary Before Grierson. In A New History of British
Documentary (pp. 18-40). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Hainstock, C., Forman, D., Broomfield, N., Bruzzi, S., Reynard, M., Henley, P. and Stoney,
G., 2014. On Robert Flaherty and the documentary form.