| Previous | Contents References |
Next |
| |
Agency In Camera OperationThe recording phase, with a camera as the tool, has been the central concern of this analysis. The previous work with informant-made film and video established its basis. Worth and Adair (1972) called a segment of film created by starting and stopping the camera a cademe. This is more commonly known as a shot. Bellman and Jules-Rosette(1977) further divided cademes into smaller meaningful units based on what they called “cademic markers.” The cademes are thus segmented into events “by camera techniques that serve as markers to show particular actors, follow central action, study interesting movements, display instruments, exhibit important medicines, and point out significant periods within a given occurrence” (Bellman and Jules-Rosette, p. 5). Their approach demonstrated that these common techniques took on particular, consistent meanings in an informant's work that revealed information about the culture and the informant's position within that culture. Applied to student videos, cademic markers were found to indicate the boundaries of camera-related events and to reflect the agency of the camera-operator in the creation of events (Beaty, 2001). The analysis focuses on the relations between the use of camera techniques and the events in front of the camera, seeing these as a dialog in which the camera responds to actions and initiates new events. The events themselves are defined as discrete actions—similar to Bakhtin’s (1986) definition of an utterance—of subjects, the camera, or a coordination of both. When events were initiated in the actions of the camera operator, such as panning from one object to another, agency is deemed high. On the other hand, if some action in front of the camera is merely noted—marked—with a cademic marker but not initiated by it, then agency is considered relatively low. A further look within and outside events adds to the analysis, but this approach facilitates a comparison across genres. When events are entirely scripted, the approach does not need radical changes. While it is difficult for the camera operator to demonstrate high levels of agency in these cases, the team producing the particular project can exert the highest levels of agency. Agency in camera operation is demonstrated not in whether or not the camera actions are scripted but in whether or not they have an impact on the scene—whether or not they use the features or placement of the camera to shape the appearance of the event. The basic question is about whether or not the camera and its operator are active or passive participants. The problem that arises is that—particularly in highly scripted student projects—the most frequent action of the camera is to start and stop. It is not uncommon for there to be no other actions. Sometimes, such as in doing interviews, this simple action can have a great deal of effect on the activity and teamed with the work of the interviewer demonstrates a high use of agency. At other times, however, the camera is simply a tool to document rather than shape events. This was particularly prevalent at Urban High. These other actions—like zooming in—can be viewed as symbolic uses of the camera, but they need not be that abstract or meaningful to be considered agentic. A simple pan from one person to another or a careful placement of the camera looking over someone's shoulder at the person that is being spoken to are highly agentic because they have a strong effect on the shape of the event. Thus agency in camera operation exists not only in the initiation of an event but in some effort to mold an event for production purposes. |
|
| Previous Contents |
Next References |