Glass Walls: A Reflexive Essay
The theoretical underpinning of Glass Walls is strongly tied to Jay Rubys’ (1980) advocacy of exposing oneself during film in order to be reflexive. This theory was combined with the importance of sound in film in order to reflect true experience (Henley, 2007). The use of spoken narrative, video diary and black screens against powerful audio were applied to align the viewers emotional experience as close as possible to the film-makers’. Ruby (1980, p.153) explains that
“I was convinced that if I could understand how someone made something and who they were, that that knowledge would cause me to become an 'insider'”.
This theory inspired much of the narrative seen in Glass Walls, as I wanted the viewer to see that I was presumably just as new to the event as they were. Exposing myself in the narrative of the film allowed for continuous reflexivity throughout, a process in which the viewer was invited to join and relate to rather than excluded from. In order to expose myself completely to the viewer, I needed to be honest about my thought process throughout the event and how this would impact their visual experience of the film. Therefore, I avoided scripting the spoken narrative and included a vlog at the end of the event, which identified how my views and beliefs had changed throughout. This form of narrative is lacking in anthropology, and I feel that by including the viewer in the film-making experience, they can better understand the context and emotions behind the lense and the reasons behind particular film-making styles.
​
Sound is critical to exposing the reality of the environment in which the film takes place (Henley, 2007). Initially, the first draft of Glass Walls had very little atmospheric sound or background noise, leaving it dry and somewhat one-dimensional. The setting of the film was a significant part of my personal experience, particularly the sounds. When we share experiences with people we do not know well, we often hold back the details we think they may not want to hear, details that might upset them or that present our own emotional vulnerabilities. The sounds of animals screaming in fear is not soft on the ear or emotional capacity, but was included in the film not only to form a sense of closeness between viewer and film-maker, but to give the viewer a segment of the real experience. I was encouraged by fellow film-makers that although these were sounds that viewers may not find pleasurable, by including such emotion-evoking audio I was essentially implying that I wanted to include the viewer completely in my experience, whilst also giving the necessary context for reflexivity.
​
Lynch (2003) suggests that sound is incredibly vital to add emotion and mood to a film, and in some cases it is all that is needed. With this in mind, very little audio adjustments or editing was used on the natural audio in Glass Walls. The sounds of animals screaming was likely the most emotional segment of the film, yet it was the only scene without visual imagery, but instead a black screen. I was inspired by the theory of Lynch (2003) that suggests an entire scene could comprise of only sound, and that sound has the potential to pull viewers into different worlds. By using a black screen, I wanted the audio to set the tone and pull the viewer into the atmosphere of the slaughterhouse without visual distraction. Upon reflection, I realised that this scene was extremely close to my own experience as the film-maker, as I often heard these sounds with my eyes closed performing a two minute silence during the killing of the animals.
​
Despite inevitable disparities between the soul of the viewer and film-maker, there are many elements of film-making that can lessen the gap between them. Visual anthropology often encourages the presentation of others as a spectacle of interest for the viewer, yet disregards the reflexive process of the film-maker and the potential for relatability to form between them. By including the film-maker in the film, their experience and their personality, the viewer is given a token of respect from the film-maker as they invite them to be an insider (Ruby, 1980). The creative process of Glass Walls was an extremely personal journey for me, as I am certain that many anthropological films are for their makers. I propose that instead of attempting to reflect the experience through visual imagery of those we are documenting, we as anthropologists should encourage each other to share a reflexive, personal documentation of our own views, beliefs and thoughts throughout the creative process, paying particular attention to how these may change over time. By doing so, the grey area of unknown context that lurks between the viewer and film-maker can be diminished, and our work can grow further into the realms of relatability and reflexivity.
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
​
References
Henley, P. (2007). Seeing, Hearing, Feeling: Sound and Despotism of the Eye in "Viual Anthropology". Visual Anthropology Review. 23 (1): 54-63.
​
Lynch, D. (2003). Action and Reaction: In Soundscape: The School of Sound Lectures 1998-2001, Larry Sider, Dianne Freeman and Jerry Sider, eds. London and New York: Wallflower Press. pp. 49-53.
Ruby, J. (1980). Exposing Yourself: Reflexivity, Anthropology and Film. Semiotica. 30 (1-2). 153-179.
​
​
​