Chapter Three

Question 3: What Gives Documentary Films a Voice of Their Own?

            Within this chapter Nichols discusses the qualities of voice, categories of voice, and documentary and the voice of the orator. According to Nichols, “having a voice involves more than using the spoken word” (Nichols 67). For example, when using the “We speak about it to you” approach, it speaks through its composition of shots, its editing together of images, and its use of music, etc. Everything that is seen or heard in a documentary represents not only the historical world but also the why the film’s maker wants to speak about that world. The voice of a documentary can make claims, purpose perspectives, and evoke feelings. It seeks to persuade or convince us by the strength of their argument or point of view and the power of their voice. However according to Nichols, the voice of documentary is not limited to the voices of unseen “gods” and visible “authorities” those who speak in the film. The voice speaks with all the means available to the filmmaker. The following decisions can create the voice of the documentary:

      1.    When to cut, or edit, and what to juxtapose

      2.   How to frame or compose a shot (close-up or long shot, low or high angle, artificial or natural lighting, color or black and white, whether to pan, zoom in or out, track or remain stationary, and so no) 

      3.   Whether to record synchronous sound at the time of shooting, and whether to add additional sound, such as voiceover translation, dubbed dialogue, music, sound effects, or commentary, at a later point

      4.   Whether to adhere to an accurate chronology or rearrange events to support a point or mood  

      5.    Whether to use archival or other people’s footage and photographs or only those images shot by the filmmaker on the spot

      6.    Which mode of documentary representation to rely on to organized the film (expository, poetic, observational, participatory, reflective, performative). (Nichols 72)

When it comes to categories of voice there are two forms of Documentary voice. First is direct address, if embodied meaning you see a person or social actor, it is usually either the voice of the authority (news anchor reporter) or an interview. If it is disembodied meaning you do not see the speaker, it is either the “voice of god” (voice over commentary) or titles/inter-titles. The second is indirect address, if embodied in this case meaning conveyed by social actors, is just observation. You just watch the actors live their lives, much like reality television. If disembodied in this case meaning conveyed by film technique, is film form, where the filmmaker tells us things by means of editing, composition, camera angle, music, effects, etc. Leaving it up to the audience to interpret how these choices add up (Nichols 76).

According to Nichols, “the voice of documentary is often that of an orator, or filmmaker, setting out to take a position or offer a proposal regarding an aspect of the historical world and to convince us of its merit” (77). However, he asks an important question, “how do we proceed when we proceed rhetorically? The classical rhetorical thinking identified three divisions and five “departments” each of which carries over to documentary film, they are invention, arrangement, style, memory, and delivery. Nichols then reviews these five departments which are discussed in chapter four (see chapter four).