SSTONER Masters Thesis FINAL
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Copyright by Spencer Winston Stoner 2013 The Thesis Committee for Spencer Winston Stoner Certifies that this is the approved version of the following thesis: Shooting the Morro: Favela Documentaries and the Politics of Meaning APPROVED BY SUPERVISING COMMITTEE: Supervisor: Lorraine Leu Joseph Straubhaar Shooting the Morro: Favela Documentaries and the Politics of Meaning by Spencer Winston Stoner, BS Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts The University of Texas at Austin May 2013 Dedication To my parents, and to Kendra for going above and beyond in your support. Abstract Shooting the Morro: Favela Documentaries and the Politics of Meaning Spencer Winston Stoner, MA The University of Texas at Austin, 2013 Supervisor: Lorraine Leu To many in the global North, the favelas of Rio de Janeiro are the most visible face of violence and poverty in Brazil. While the favela film genre (and its subset, the favela documentary) has received significant study, there is a gap in understanding how these filmic texts are created as a result of individual production processes. How do decisions made during the course of production translate into imaginaries, representations, and on-screen content? This research locates multiple forms of non- fiction video within the wider context of mediated representations of poverty and violence in favelas, identifying the tools, mechanisms, and specific tactics employed by both favela stakeholders and production personnel in the co-production of these often heavily-mediated images. Utilizing key informant interviews with Rio-based documentary production personnel actively shooting in favelas, this research highlights specific production processes to understand how implicit incentive structures embodied in production shape and influence representations of the favela space. These findings make the case for understanding non-fiction favela films as the product of a highly v structured and nuanced, if asymmetrical, co-production between filmmaker and subjects, rather than a simple linear imposition of meaning from above. These results suggest that the combination of individual production strategies with ongoing changes within the city related to “pacification” serves to simultaneously undermine and re-inscribe traditional imaginaries and mediatic geographies of the favela space. vi Table of Contents List of Figures........................................................................................................ ix List of Images ..........................................................................................................x PROLOGUE ............................................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................3 LIMITATIONS...............................................................................................6 METHODS .....................................................................................................8 REVIEW OF LITERATURE ................................................................................11 CHAPTER 1 - THE PLAYING FIELD ................................................................15 POWER AND MEDIATION .......................................................................17 POLITICS OF THE FAVELA, POLITICS OF THE PRODUTORA .........20 SYMBIOSIS AND NEGOTIATION ...........................................................23 ON CAMERA...............................................................................................26 Implications of Race ............................................................................28 ON SET.........................................................................................................30 IMPACTS OF SECURITY & PACIFICATION..........................................31 SECURITY AND TOPOGRAPHY .............................................................33 IMPACTS OF TOPOGRAPHY ...................................................................37 Everybody loves Rocinha ....................................................................38 CHAPTER 2 - CONTESTATION AND THE PRODUCTION OF MEANING .42 CENSORSHIP AND OPTING FOR INVISIBILITY..................................42 THE POTENTIAL FOR VISIBILITY AS A SUBALTERN TOOL...........44 RITUAL PERFORMANCE .........................................................................48 STRATEGIES OF THE PRODUTORA ......................................................50 vii CONCLUSION & IMPLICATIONS FOR THE FIELD ......................................53 Glossary & Acronyms ...........................................................................................58 References..............................................................................................................60 viii List of Figures Figure 1 - Author’s map of hierarchy flow among produtora and community stakeholders.......................................................................................22 ix List of Images Image 1 - B-ROLL of bullet holes alludes to a phantasmagoric violence that need not actually be present or actively depicted............................................36 Image 2 - Beautiful shots of the Vidigal favela grace the titles of Ônibus 174 (Padilha 2002), but otherwise bear little connection to the film. ....................40 Image 3 - Rocinha as it appears during Ze's recce (left) and Rocinha as it appeared in the final program (right)....................................................................46 Image 4 - Rosali's performance draws from her knowledge of Hollywood tropes.49 x PROLOGUE On the cusp of graduate studies, I found myself working as a field producer on a documentary program commissioned by a major cable television network. The topic of the program was ancient Maya society and would necessitate a two week long shoot in northern Guatemala. Outside of this, we were given few other guidelines. I began pre- production about a month and a half in advance, amassing potential on-screen contributors even as the script was still under development. These contributors would be local stakeholders willing to appear on camera, who would allow us to shoot at their locations and could help provide us with story ideas. Being based in DC at the time, these contacts in Guatemala were an essential lifeline for us as a production crew – the shoot could literally not take place without them. Each of the stakeholders we were partnering with had their own incentive for participating. Their relationship to us was asymmetrical and shaped by our respective hierarchies. Collectively, we were hardly a unified front. An indigenous NGO wanted to promote its mission and set right commonly held misconceptions about the Maya people. An archaeological team wanted to increase its fundraising opportunities and promote an ideological mission that was driving the dig. The production company that was producing the project wanted to save money, attract viewers and convince their client to approve a second season. Sometimes our mutual goals overlapped. Many times they were in direct conflict with each other. The NGO found the archaeological foundation’s worldview repugnant. The foundation wanted us to shoot interviews with sponsors that would never make the final cut and eat up costly production hours. The director wanted to attract viewers by playing up stereotypical imagery of ancient Maya bloodletting rituals. I, myself, had my own perspectives about what a responsible representation of the subject matter would be, and was hoping to influence the production with this in mind. 1 In short, each stakeholder had their own way of trying to influence the final product, up to and including the individuals who appeared on the program and agreed to represent themselves on television. This production was a collaborative effort in every sense of the word and yet inherently asymmetrical. When the NGO found out we were working with the archaeologist, they pulled out. I was able to eventually put pressure on the director to drop the bloodletting dramatics. Contrary to the way that the production of media is typically seen (Hallin and Mancini 2010, McChesney 2010), the production as a whole was about as far removed from a homogenous effort as you can get. Instead of being uniformly the result of homogenized global media systems, or a singular textual product resulting from the work of an auteur, our documentary shoot was dramatically shaped by a series of ingrained incentive structures present in both local and production- related politics. Local elements within the landscape and the very subject matter of the production were laced with carrots and sticks that served the interests and strategies of individual parties during the production. Media systems scholars tend to study the impact of global, national, and regional systems on the format and content of media produced, whereas film scholars may analyze meaning after it has already been produced. These existing bases of scholarship reveal a glaring gap in understanding how and where these areas connect and overlap. How do national and global systems actually affect the decisions made during the course of documentary production? How do decisions made during the course of production translate into imaginaries, representations, and on-screen content? The research that follows will