14 - The Power of Art

by: Patrick, Brook and Christopher

WASTE LAND

Vik Muniz a postmodern artist who has been at the peek of his career in the past few years and is making art that is selling for tons of money. He is a very warm person who is so nice to everyone that he encounters and finds the best out of any situation. Waste land is a documentary directed by Lucy Walker, Karen Harley and Joãn Jardim. The movie follows Muniz over the spam of two years as he goes into the biggest landfill in the world that is located close to Rio de Janeiro. The landfill is called Jardim Gramach. Vik meets the workers who are there everyday picking out recyclable materials from Jardim Gramach. They can take the recyclables and sell them for decent money so they do not need to resort to stealing, prostitution, or selling drugs in the huge metropolis of Rio de Janeiro. The main characters that Vik meets here are, Tiaõ, Zumbi, Suelem, Isis, Irma, Valter and Magna.  The film goes over all of their lives and shows what they do on a daily basis and how their families are and also shows them at the landfill doing their work. It follows Tiaõ more than anyone throughout the film, because he has in own project going on to raise awareness about the pickers who are essentially the only source of recycling for the entire city.  Viks plan is to give these workers a voice and also gives them way more publicity to show what is happening in the landfill and how they are making a difference in Rio. He decides to take these people and do recreations of past art works. He makes them at a huge size and also he only uses recyclable materials from the dump to make these artworks. He uses anything that he can find in there, such as pieces of film for black lines, and other recyclables to fill in the artworks.

Vik gives these people a lot of confidence in themselves that they can do other things and get out of the landfill and have a good life. Like Isis who while making one of the pieces says to Tiaõ “I’m an artist now”. Even Tiaõ got an interview on a show to talk about his project. He really got his word out to the world and has even been told that he can run for president. Vik realizes at this point in his life that he has everything he needs and he wants to give back to something. Being Brazilian himself he decides this would be the best thing he can do. He gives 100% of the sales from his “Pictures of Garbage” and gives it to the ACAMJG  (Association of Recycling Pickers of Jardim Gramacho). He raises 250 000 dollars for them in total. This shows that art has a huge Power in our world it builds a bridge between others and us. Aesthetic Pleasure makes us feel better and alive in a different way that most things in the world.  Art gives everyone a creative potential, any human can create and use imagination for the better and create something you never thought you could. The power of art really can make a difference anywhere in the world and this Documentary really shows that well, These people were nothing but workers in a dump before Vik exposed them to the world. Anyone can do amazing things no matter what you’re past life is or where you are born.

Born Into Brothels

Born Into Brothels: Calcutta's Red Light Kids is an American 2004 documentary that focuses on the children of prostitutes in Sonagachi, India. The film is directed by Zana Briski, a documentary photographer and Ross Kauffman. The situation in the West Bengal state’s red light district was and is still one of poverty. The area is known for its prostitute clogged streets, human trafficking and dangerous sexually transmitted infections. While nongovernmental organizations are trying to maintain a safe environment for the sex workers, it is still a struggle to enforce worker rights and keep the rates of STIs below 5%.

Zana Briski brings us beyond the socioeconomic struggles of the prostitutes by showing us the world of the children named Kochi, Avijit, Shanti, Manik, Puja, Gour, Suchitra, Tapasi and Mamuni. Her first intentions were to photograph their mothers, but she soon befriended the children and offered to teach them some photography techniques. The film gives us an insight into the perspective of the often neglected and heavily chore ridden children. The audience is taken through the children’s daily lives of housework and cleaning as they wait to be old enough to contribute financially to their families. Briski also dives into the education of the children as they work in school and develop new photography skills. We can quite literally see through their eyes as we view their photographs, and some are truly amazing. One boy, Avijit Halder was so successful that he ended up participating in a photo talent contest in Amsterdam and later went on to receive an education in filmmaking in New York University. His story as well as Brisky’s efforts to introduce a passion for art in the at risk youth have changed lives.
However, the movie is not without controversy. Some argue that the introduction of art into the lives of the overworked children will give them a dream and some hope. A dream to strive for can really make a change in a place where money is so desperately needed that young children must grow up to be sex workers. Also the money raised from the film crew’s auctions and perhaps even future auction can pay for education. After all, the charity auctions did raise a convincing $100, 000 US that paid the tuitions for the eight children in the movie. The problem is that other children that were sent to boarding schools returned home soon after. It’s difficult to break the cycle of housework, prostitution and childbirth. Furthermore, some criticise the filmmakers for portraying the children’s parents as being uncaring. The parents, and especially the mothers, simply need to make a living however they can. Without a demand for employment, they are basically forced into the sex trade. We may see it as a degrading career, but to them it is everyday life because they were most probably born because of it. That being said, it is still very easy for them succumb to alcohol and drug abuse. Yet, some say that not enough effort was taken by the filmmakers to demonstrate the great efforts that the mothers are taking to promote worker’s rights, make condoms more widely used and stop violent abuse.




Poverty can cause serious problems in a community. Calcutta is definitely no exception. At the end of the day the bills need to be paid and the children need to get an education. It’s a shame that the children will be tempted to continue the tradition of working in a sex industry. It isn’t enjoyable, it’s dangerous and the clients are often abusive as well. Briski gives a chance to the children to be heard. She also brings an element of fun into their lives. Can you imagine a childhood without playtime? Mamuni, a major character in the film, said “When I have the camera in my hand, it tickles my hand and I must take a picture right away.” Just the way she said it was lighthearted and you could tell that she and the others were overjoyed.
Overall, the film is well organised in its tracking of the children’s progression. The intent of the film was to bring an inspiration force into the children’s lives through an expression of creativity. It could provide a medium for the young ones to inform others of their problems, while making money to fund an education for the future generations. Whether it is actually profiting off the misfortune of the prostitutes, or honestly attempting to make a positive difference to the lives of the innocent children is up to you to decide.

             These films help us to understand how vast the world is and how many different societies there are. In these films we see two situations that people are stuck in with little choice, and it reminds us of how lucky we are to live in Canada. In the first film that we watched in class, Waste Land, the people we see are forced to pick through garbage for a small amounts of money. What they make in a week is probably less than what we spend at McDonald’s for lunch. We realize, or at least I did, how lucky we are to live in the society we do, where there is a minimum wage and where the government helps those who need it. We may complain that the government should do more, however when compared to other countries, our government is pretty good. We have just become accustomed to the higher standard of living that we have. If it was possible I would explain what it’d be like to have to grow up in the conditions that the kids in “Born into Brothels” do, but it’s not because no one could ever know unless they grew up in the Calcutta red light district. When you think about the people working at the Jardim Gramacho it really shows how blessed we are in north America, I mean people complain everyday about going to work and just wanting to stay in their warm home all day, and these people travel so far just to get a small sum of money to take care of their family’s. I feel as though as I write this I should never take school or work for granted again but the way our society is built, I am going to wake up tomorrow and just want to stay home in my comfortable bed all day. The closest we can get to understand these people is by watching movies like these two that really make you think deeply about how much we take things for granted

            These two movies do a good job at promoting awareness for these two niche groups of people, but also about all unfortunate communities. As maybe after seeing these movies you will not get up and donate money to foundation such as “Kids with Cameras” (http://www.kids-with-cameras.org/home/), but maybe next time you see someone shaking a Tim Horton’s cup outside the metro, you’ll decide that the least you could do, would be to give them a couple bucks to help them out. As I said, the films did a good job to raise awareness, and I think that is exactly what their goal was. I don’t think Vik decided to make “Waste Land” to promote his art or himself as an artist, but to send a message to the rest of the world about the conditions people are forced to live under.

In conclusion this film has taught us that nothing should be taken for granted even a crappy minimum wage job at subway. It also shows how much we have in the western world and how places that we rarely hear anything of, have so many problems and issues that need to be dealt with. It gives us the want to help and change the way things are going.  

13 - Learn. Fight. Love.

A Look On Global Activism
By Nicholas, Nathalie, Britti and Delaxan

This week, we took a look at the AIDS epidemic that hit America in the 1980s and 1990s. We follow the gay community and a young group of AIDS protesters called ACT-UP as they go out into the street to demand help from the government, as well as from divers medical industries and from the community at large. In “How To Survive A Plague”, we follow survivors, researchers, protesters, victims and witnesses as they fight to get the medication and the help they deserve. We look at how art played a major role in exposing the crisis and we also look at another film called “We Were Here” that talks about the AIDS crisis in San Francisco’s Castro district (America’s most popular gay community).

ACT-UP and learn "How To Survive A Plague"

“How to Survive a Plague” was a 2012 American documentary film based on the beginning of the AIDS epidemic. Director, David France, an openly gay writer known best for his journalism on LGBT topics, followed the efforts of AIDS activists and founders of the direction action group ACT UP. Bearing the mildly shocking motto Silence = Death, this passionate group dedicated themselves not only to spreading awareness of the AIDS virus, but to creating new treatment plans in order to inspire and enhance the lives of those currently living with AIDS. They pressed for a meaningful response from the government to confront this serious health problem. Although faced with mass ignorance by much of the media, the ACT UP group built a strong community throughout 1970. A series of non-violent demonstrations, such as covering the Luxor Obelisk in a giant pink condom, brought plenty of attention to the cause.

Global activism plays a great role in each of our lives, as it, ultimately, shapes the world we live in. These activists live by the mantra, Learn. Fight. Love, and understand that activism is a movement that includes an entire community. All actions are performed as whole. Despite a wide range of differences, there are those that choose to come together to fight towards a common end. We discuss the idea of documentary as witness, showing that even the most unlikely people are capable of making a difference. Taking control of a situation is the first step to solving it; this was clearly demonstrated in “How to Survive a Plague.” The community grew politicized, challenged officials, and pushed forth their ideas, which, in turn, proved to be an efficient strategy. The use of art in activism as it allowed them to articulate and transfer important knowledge to the public as well as the government officials. Their determination allowed them to come to such a successful conclusion. The AIDS virus is still cutting short the lives of innumerable amounts of people to this day. However, it is this activism that offers hope for a new world, one that does not ignore the pleas of its people. It is with this undying determination that the ACT UP protests proved so successful against the outbreak of discrimination towards people with AIDS.

Screaming Out "We Were Here" in the Castro
The second documentary our team was assigned to view was voted the Best Documentary Feature Film at the 2011 Mumbai Queer Film Festival.“We Were Here”, directed by David Weissman and Bill Weber, describes the AIDS crisis in San Francisco in the late 1980s and in the early 1990s. The documentary starts off by giving the viewer a short background story of the Castro district in San Francisco. Many gay men came to the Castro to be among other gays, to feel like they were part of a community and to “enjoy themselves”. Paul Boneberg, one of the many people who devoted his life to fighting back and caring for those living with HIV, is even quoted by saying “if you took a bunch of young men and said have as much sex as you can have, how much sex would they have? A lot of sex.” The Castro was the home to many bath houses, where young men would go to meet up, fool around and have, in most cases, unprotected sex.

The documentary film focuses on five individuals who played different roles during the crisis. The first person we see is a man called Ed Wolf who played the role of a caregiver during the epidemic. He recalls seeing for the first time on a pharmacy window a warning about “Gay Cancer” in 1981. It was at that point he said that many people started getting sick. Luckily for Ed he had no partner at the time, so he didn't contract the virus. The filmmakers also talk to two other gentlemen, Guy Clark and Daniel Goldstein. Guy was working as a florist at the time and wasn't infected with the disease. He remembered having to help out many people who didn't have enough money to pay for flowers for their partners funeral and he also recollected how the obituaries in the news papers grew at such a horrific pace. Daniel Goldstein’s role during the epidemic was a very frightening and sad one, he was a patient who slowly saw all of his friends and two of his partners die. Daniel and his first partner were one of the first people to take medicine that doctors thought could cure the virus. Goldstein stopped talking the drug however because he hated the horrible after effects. In the end, out of forty patients, he was the only survivor. Goldstein role becomes clear to us when he told the filmmakers in the beginning of the documentary “none of my friends are around, so I want to tell their story as much as I want to tell my story”. A nurse was also interviewed in the documentary. Eileen Glutzer took care of many AIDS victims during the crisis. She treated them, loved them and would almost always watch them die in the end. Many people refused to help AIDS victims in the beginning because they were scared to catch the virus, but Eileen always helped, because these people weren't only victims, many of them were her friends.

As we saw during class, AIDS did start off as being called a “Gay Cancer” and the victims who were infected had a very hard time finding treatment due to the ignorance of the population. Eileen Glutzer even recalls being told to put gloves on while handling a patient’s blood because they didn't know what the disease was all about. There was also a lot of discrimination going around because of a homophobic government. Some parents even said to people like Ed Wolf that the only worst thing then seeing their son deathly ill was knowing that they were queer. In the documentary Guy Clark also speaks about how the obituaries would just grow and grow. During the discussion we spoke about how the gay community took over the media to inform the population about what was going on and what the latest news was (even if that news was who had died during the week). The support of the community was also a big asset to helping fight the epidemic. Ed Wolf gets emotional when he speaks about how great the lesbian community in helping the cause, because they weren't always very well treated in the past. The idea of LEARN, FIGHT, LOVE was also present in the film. Everyone in the community who was infected or who knew someone who was infected tried to learn as much as possible about the drug in order to help find a cure. One very important thing they realized was that using protecting while having sex helped diminish the risk of transmitting the disease. The population would then have to fight the government in order to get better funding and more help. At one point in the documentary, the interviewees speak about how great ACT-UP was, but they also explain that everyone had their role and the role of some people was to just help the sick feel loved and not alone. People who helped the sick like this played a key role in helping the survivors. Daniel Goldstein says himself that without the support of his friends and family, he would have probably taken his own life because he felt so useless and miserable. At the end of the epidemic, when the drug they were looking for was found, people in the Castro, such as Guy Clark, recall seeing the sick gradually get better. Many friends and lovers were lost during those years and when the whole crisis was over, people who dedicated their life to helping the cause and the survivors found it very hard to get back to living a normal life. Despite this, with the constant support, compassion and empathy the gay community had for one another, most of the victims as well as the people who supported them were able to find a sense of love and peace of mind. In the end, victims like Daniel Goldstein and caretakers like Ed Wolf were able to find love and move on with their lives with the memory of those they lost in their hearts.

We Were Here was a film about the AIDS epidemic that took place in the 1980s, but after watching it, it’s not hard to see that it’s also celebrating the story of those who were lost during the epidemic. The people interviewed had witnessed all of their friends die one by one and, being the survivors, they felt like it was important to tell not only their story, but to also tell their story as a witness to the whole AIDS crisis. In a way, the plague was similar to a war: There was fighting, death and survival. The stories of the ones who were lost will always stay with those who survived and those survivors will always ask themselves why they were the ones who survived.

Personal Reflection and Analysis on
“How to Survive a Plague”

The epidemic was huge and millions of people were affected by it and are still affected to this day. Research has greatly increased but the disease is still killing millions, the majority of which cannot afford medical treatment. Aids was also known as the gay cancer, gay plague and the gay-related immunodeficiency, in the late 1970s and early 1980s when it began to surface in the US. The films we viewed show us the lack of concern and attention given to the disease all due to the fact that it mostly affected gays. We are shown the importance of standing up for what we believe in and making that difference. The films make one think about the power we have but often don't use, as well as the strength of determination.

“How to Survive a Plague,” directed by David France demonstrates the immense battle of Aids and the power of activism. Through watching this film we learn that people can be extremely cruel to another other based on something as personal as your sexual orientation. The ignorance of people is shocking in “How to Survive a Plague” the disease only becomes recognized once authorities realize it is effecting more than homosexuals. The film teaches us that we do have the power and we are never powerless. It is easy to turn a blind eye if we are not directly impacted but we must be proactive and help one and other. We live in a world driven by money and power and those in control must learn to distribute their money in positive ways. The film hopes to show the power of activism, we must learn, fight and love. As a population we must work as a team and change what we do not think is right in the world. We have the power, we just need the focus and determination! Aids research has become a major focus but it remains uncured, to learn more about the disease visit http://aids.gov/

Personal Reflection & Analysis on “We Were Here” 

The documentary We Were Here shows us the ability for a community to come together to fight a disease that killed over 15,000 people. The resilience each person has to deal with an unexpected disaster is very inspiring and it reveals our compassion for one another. Many of the infected men did numerous things so that others with the disease could live. Everyone has a fight in them for survival and it is part of human nature. People are fearful of the things they don’t know and are quick to judge without even knowing much on the subject. People want to feel safe and that is one of the reasons why many people wanted those with aids to have special identification or be tattooed. Many people believed being gay was a sin. The film was made to show its viewers about the arrival and impact of aids in those years and teach us not to treat people differently. Everyone deserves medical care, social services and community support. The use of interviews, period photographs and news footage seems to make the past present and more touching to the heart. The survivors of the epidemic share their stories and send off a powerful message that stirs up emotions.
Cinematographer Marsha Kahm did a great job on focusing in on the sentiments shown by the interviewees during their stories. Generosity, compassion, courage and love are what are emphasized in this film and is what should be at the core of every functional community.

The AIDS crisis that hit America in the 1980s and 1990s was one of the closes calls we’ve had to losing a core group of people in our communities. The gay community learnt how to fight and how to construct arguments as well as develop ways to make themselves heard by the people who were in charge of distributing the drugs they needed to live and seen by the homophobic government, who was showing a great lack of support. By learning about their crisis and about their disease, AIDS victims were able to fight not only on the streets, as well as on television stations. In the end, the survivors and witnesses of the epidemic make sure, in both films, to retell their story, as well as the story of those who were lost, in a way that will show the future generations what they accomplished by fighting for their ultimate right: The right to live.

12 - Portraits of the Self

Portraits of the Self

By: Brent, Daphné and Stéfanie

This week, we saw how a documentary film could be used as a way to make a portrait of people; either the filmmaker itself or a distinct group of people. How the filmmaker chooses to portrait someone influences the view we have of that person. We saw earlier this semester how Michael Moore presented Charlton Heston to us in way to make us believe he was a stupid, heartless man. Moore trapped him in his house and manipulated his questions to make it impossible for Heston to truthfully answer; he represents the NRA, he cannot talk against it. Contrary to Moore, Agnes Varda and Jonathan Caouette either show vulnerability of the character or an objective portrait.

Les Glaneurs et la Glaneuse (The Gleaners and I): What a Waste!

Agnes Varda has been making films for almost fifty years. Focused on showing a realist portrait of the world, most of her films follow the lives of a group of people. In The Gleaners and I, we see how gleaners all around France live, and why they glean. Made in France, this 82 minutes film was awarded the Melies Prize for Best French Film of 2000 by the French Union of Film Critics. This film documents those who scavenge and fight to survive in both urban and rural areas of France. Showing her freedom to experiment by using just a digital camera, Varda travelled through France for several months to meet today’s gleaners and record her meetings. Throughout the film, Varda's comforting, dry voice-over narration is heard, which makes the 'I' of the film's title a visible, vibrant presence in the film. Varda also films her own signs of aging and talks flexibly about death, "Death is around the corner.” For example the graying of her hair in the beginning of the film (when she brushes her hair) and the age spots on her hands. Ironically, she captures her old characteristics but also films herself doing things a child would do, like closing her hand on trucks and other childlike play.  

Here is an example of Varda's childlike play:

One of the incredible things that Varda does is that she never humiliates or emotionalizes her interviewees and makes them feel as comfortable as possible. The gleaners in this film are fascinating individuals that talk openly about their lives and economic situations. This film is an unanticipated path that leads to a man who digs through the rubbish left over in a Paris market. Francois, a tough young man who subsides just on what he finds in the garbage. He feels like it’s a duty to show people how much they waste and gleans by conviction. Later on, Varda finds out that this man has been a teacher for literacy for six years and even interviews him in his classroom. This film is a wandering-road movie and Varda's observations during her travel in The Gleaners and I show the class inequalities in France.

This film showed that we are so keen on having potatoes the perfect size that companies throw tons of perfectly good potatoes away that could be put to good use. It doesn’t have to do with just potatoes, but tons of things in general in our world that we take for granted. The gleaners in this film are people who pick up these “unapproved” potatoes and use them to their advantage. These people aren’t necessarily poor or don’t have money, many of them are just regular people. Varda filmed many different kinds of gleaners. For example, she interviewed gypsies, teachers, mothers and many more. There were even little kids who are having fun as if it were apple picking but with potatoes. Not only does Varda observe these gleaners, she brings her own so that they can use this perfectly fine vegetable and donate it to charity for people who are in need. At one point in the film, two men were interviewed and filmed so we can see how they take advantage of thrown out food that’s still edible. Not only do they pick up food, they also take broken stoves or refrigerators and fix them. We see that their home is filled with working stoves and refrigerators. Already it’s amazing how these men can cook good meals with these old foods but they also share whatever they make and offer it to an old lady who lives near by. One of the craziest things is that a lot of people glean by choice, like Francois the teacher. 

Varda didn’t put hard work into making this film for the money as she did it to show the world how much we waste. She believes that the old tradition of gleaning was extremely healthy for our planet. Varda believes that the key to a good documentary is that “You pick ideas, you pick images, you pick emotions from other people, and then you make it into a film” Agnes says that she also gleans. She gleans ideas and images to put together a documentary. This film invites to be more open-minded and less judgemental. Agnes wants us to question our life styles  by showing us different scenes of waste. She shows us images that we have to make sense of. 

Through The Gleaners and I, Varda does simultaneously a portrait of herself as well as a portrait of the humankind. For example, when she combs her hair, it is not something glamorous; it is simply a natural gesture that shows her aging. She sees it herself and wants to show us. It is not something that every filmmaker would do; showing vulnerability and personal weaknesses. Then, she does a portrait of the humankind.  She introduces many gleaners to us some more important than others, like Francois. Playing a big part of the documentary, Francois is a person with whom we found ourselves sympathizing with. At the premiere in France, he was invited to assist by Varda. After the film, he talked with the viewers and even introduced them to gleaning; he gave them all cake and asked them to taste it, they liked it. Afterwards, he told them that the he found the cake in the garbage and it was perished. So, it truly shows that, like he says, we have to trust our nose more than the date. 

For how long has our society had such high standards? What happened to when everything that was in sight was appreciated? Are we so different from the people interviewed? These people are the core of this film since Varda builds portraits of them to make them sympathetic or not. Believe it or not, the gleaners show us how to be human and we establish a relationship with them.

Tarnation: Family Videos as a Therapy

This 88 minutes documentary was made over the course of about 20 years by Jonathan Caouette. It was released in the United States in 2003. What is impressive about this is that it was done on a budget of 218$. We see Caouette grow throughout the movie and it starts with his eleven-year-old self. This film attempts to show the filmmaker’s experiences growing up being gay with a schizophrenic mother. We can say that is it an experimental film because he used a lot of home videos and family pictures. The editing was done with Imovie, which shows that it legitimately is an amateur documentary. It also gives us a bigger sense of realism and it feels like we are a part of his story.

Here is a video where Caouette explains why he did his film, and how he achieved it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehUnvv4Xykw

Caouette’s mother and him left for Chicago with no money or place to stay. Living on the streets with little protection, Caouette’s mother, Renée, was raped in front of her son. Borrowing money from Renée’s parents, they took the bus back home to Texas but got thrown out half way there because Renée was disturbing the passengers. 

Caouette was shortly after taken away from his mother and was put under his grand-parents care. A couple of years later, social services took him away from them and put him into multiple foster homes while his mother went to jail from 1977 to 1980. He was psychologically and physically abused: he would get tied up and beaten by his guardians. Caouette would do video diaries and the first one we see of Caouette is when he is 11 years old: he is dressed as a woman and claims to be named Hillary. He is acting out a scene where he is giving his testimony to the police because he was beaten up by her husband while she was pregnant. We see another one shortly after of him playing a character named Shirelle, talking about everything and nothing. 

We get glimpses inside Caouette’s head as he explains to us how he thinks maybe he is gay because of when he was sexually abused. He desires it but does not want to actually do it. He claims; “I am not crazy, I am an idiot.” From 1987 to 1993 Caouette’s grand-parents hospitalized him eight times. In the fall of 1986, he became friends with a drug dealer, while he was visiting his mother in Chicago, who gave him two joints that he later learned had PCP and formaldehyde in them. Since then, Caouette has not been able to concentrate; he has a depersonalization trouble and feels as if he is constantly living in a dream. 

At 13 years old, Caouette started hanging out at a gay club named Visions that was for people over 18 years of age. He would dress up as a gothic woman to get in. He made a handful of amateur films such as ankle slasher, spit and blood boys, Rosemary Davis etc... He dreams of starring in musicals such as ‘hair’ and wants to make one based on his own life. At 15 years old, he has his first boyfriend named Michael. His relationship lasted all of his high school years. Michael and he put up a musical version of Blue Velvet. All of this happened while Caouette’s mother kept coming in and out of hospital. 

From 1986-1991, Caouette tried committing suicide at least once a week and would vandalize his house. Caouette would dream that he would locate his father and he would tell him that he had no idea he existed and that he could have been a part of his life. Jonathan wants to get out of his grand-parents’ house. His grand-mother passes away in 1995 he then leaves for New York. In 1998, he gets a job as an actor. He finally got the chance to star in the musical ‘Hair’, he did commercials and played in 17 student films. He then met David, who became his boyfriend. Renée went to New York for the first time in 2000 and reconnected with Jonathan. David and Jonathan move in together in Brooklyn. His mother moves in with him soon after. He tries to talk to her and understand why she became this way and she says: ‘‘Sick parents raise sick children.”

He finally located his father in 2002. He met him accompanied by his mother. It was the first time they were together in 30 years. His father and he kept touch. In 2002, his mother suffered from a Lithium overdose which led her to realize that she has to get better. He made a second movie, which is seen as a sequel to Tarnation. It is called Walk Away Renée, a film about his mother’s story. He felt that he needed to make a movie about his mother`s life and so much was left out in Tarnation. 

It relates to this week topic since it really is a portrait of the humankind, one human in particular; Jonathan Caouette. The way the people are presented is not objective and we see the filmmaker’s vulnerability in this documentary. 

First of all, we have home videos to show how toxic his family truly was. In this film, his whole family do damaging acts: his grand-mother smokes even if she knows she is going to die soon because of it. His mother left him with her parents and went away. Caouette was just a child, and he didn’t have anyone to take care of him. When she came back, she took him to Chicago, but they lived in the streets and didn’t have any money, food or shelter. Just his father left them when he was really young; nothing in this family’s life was going well. Still, he really built a portrait of his family, but mostly his mother in a way that we don’t judge them so much. Normally, a messed up family like his would generate negative emotions, like anger inside the viewer’s heart. But, Caouette uses the images in a way that we would sympathetic towards them instead of angry against them. We don’t feel like he is using his mother to get money, but mostly to liberate himself; he felt so much pain because of his relationship with her that he had to let it all out of his chest. He wants to show his struggle throughout his teenage years: dealing with his schizophrenic mother, him being gay in a conservative state and having no support at all from his family. We don’t necessarily create a relationship with any of the portraits he did, but we do feel emotions watching the film. We really feel bad looking at such a damaged child.

Second-of-all, he shows how vulnerable he is. For example, he shows us a scene where he acts as if he was a woman whose husband is beating her. We can see how weird it is that such young boy can relate to this subject matter. Also, just showing his family like this puts him in a very delicate position: he chose to let the world know about his life, in a very raw way. He didn’t show only show the good times they had, like when he met his dad and his mother was there with him. That was a good moment. But, he mostly showed the worse moments, like when his mom was raped in front of him. 

  

So, what he puts in his film and what he leaves out of it really shapes our view of his family. Maybe that in Walk Away Renée we can see more layers in Renée, but in Tarnation, we mostly see how he lived through it. Basically, Tarnation relates to this week’s topic because it is a raw portrait of Jonathan Caouette. He learned about himself by making this documentary; it really worked as a mirror. 

Another interesting link is an interview that Caouette did where he explained a bit more about his background, but also how he felt facing the public’s response and questions. http://movies.about.com/od/directorinterviews/a/tarnation101504.htm

How are they alike?

Both films share a very personal view of life. With The Gleaners and I, Agnès Varda showed us not only the gleaners, but also herself. In the making of that film, she discovered the work of the gleaners; how they lived, why they decided to glean, or what circumstances brought them to glean, but she also showed that making a film is a form of gleaning; picking images here and there, put them together and create a meaning. We saw many inspiring people, especially François, with his rain boots. She also makes us realize that we throw things that are still good, we are wasting a lot of materials and food. Varda discovered herself through that film too; she said that she felt like an unknown monster, she can feel her body aging, but she still acts childishly. She shows us signs of her aging, like her hair turning grey, and her wrinkled hands. Still, she tries to catch trucks passing by, a very childish act by her aging hands. What she shows also is that we shouldn’t judge people; she started off her film by an honest curiosity about the gleaners, she never looked down on them. We feel like this is why the film works so well; the gleaners didn’t feel they were being judged, they had someone listening to what they had to say, for once. We can see how people can live out of gleaning, and that in the end, the gleaners are even helping the cultivators. We also see a touching truth; even when they don’t have a lot of money, the gleaners share with each other, they help the others, like with the food. Finally, with The Gleaners And I, we can learn to be more careful about the waste that we do, to trust our nose instead of the best before date. 

Then, Tarnation is also a very personal film. We can clearly see how Caouette survived his troubled life by filming himself. It is really hard to expose ourselves in such a deep way, and the film Caouette did is really raw. He said in an interview that the question and answer sessions were really hard, because people would ask him about his mother, if she was getting better, and some other very personal details. So, it would be hard for him to answer, since there were deeply personal questions. Caouette did the film first for himself; he didn’t plan on showing it to the world. Still, he did and it ended up in Festival de Cannes and Sundance Film Festival. We think that it really shows that our own life can inspire others, and make some change, even if we think it’s just a boring and horrible life. For Caouette, filming his life was liberating, it made it easier to live every day. Since he didn’t have anyone he could tell about it when he was young, filming his life made him take a step back and look at his life as if he was a stranger. Also, it was like his personal diary; it was his way to express what he felt, and we all feel better once everything is said. He showed us how damaging life could be, and even if it leaves scars, finding a way to make it a film can be helpful. He used the camera as a defensive strategy; he filmed what he lived, so that he could see through the camera’s eye that what he was living was actually happening, then he could watch it later and try to make sense out of it, since the moment was captured in film. We can learn from Tarnation that when life is harsh, we can escape in something we love, a form of art where we get to understand ourselves. Finally, we can see how subjective a documentary could be; from the exterior, Renée could be seen as an irresponsible mother, but through his eyes, we see her as a loving mother who is deeply sick. 

Here is a link to Caouette’s personal blog: http://jonathancaouette.blogspot.ca/

Wrapping Up

As a conclusion, we can see how looking at a film, we can actually look through people. The making of a film can be seen as gleaning, picking up bits and pieces everywhere to make a film, or even a therapy as Caouette did. The camera can become the attentive person we all need, one day or another in our lives. Also, we should look at ourselves more often; take some time to take a look back on our lives to see if it’s what we want. To do a retrospective can be helpful; we get to know ourselves and the world that surround us.