SocialRelationsInBoardingHigh

Social Relations At Boarding High With Wicket and Jerome

The project by Wicket and Jerome is dramatically different from the other two projects because of the greater freedom they had during production and because of the very different relations they had with their school. The students who volunteered at the other schools tended to have positive relationships with school simply because such students were more likely to volunteer and to create some video for analysis. At Boarding High, however, there seemed to be a great ambivalence among all the students—not surprising given the school’s history and the statement of the art teacher about students only being sent to the school after being expelled from other schools. During observations, Wicket and Jerome—like the rest of the students—displayed reserve and a degree of passivity when called upon by adults for reaction. I looked toward the video with a hope of understanding and was delighted to find that I came to know these students—or at least whom they were for a very small portion of their lives—through their video project. When I interviewed them, I learned more, particularly in terms of the overall difference in how they narrated their video. The video reveals aspects of their relations that would not have been available for observation. A duality is revealed that was not present in the other two focal projects and did not appear in any of the projects at the other two schools; the duality was present in other projects at Boarding High but not with such clarity.

The two worlds of Wicket and Jerome’s school experience—at their simplest—were one with adults and one without. But of course this distinction is an oversimplification; there were adults with whom a blurring of boundaries was visible. In general, the world with adults is one in which the students are respectful and reserved, and the world without is where students assert both power and closeness. This difference is remarkably consistent with Bernstein’s “positional families” in which adults maintain their authority and “children [are] socialized through unsupervised age peers or mates” (1971, p. 160). The analysis of four adjacent shots demonstrate the difference. Due to questionable details, the analysis is speculative but supported by other parts of the project. The first of the three shots was described as an example of recording through a window and as video graffiti in which the students mocked the authority of the men, referred elsewhere as “security.” Illustration 29 shows a still from the beginning of the second shot, in which Jerome recorded the staff through the glass as he moved toward the door, and three stills as he begins to speak with them. Jerome’s quality of speaking changed dramatically as he moved from one still to the next (a quality that can be heard in the video).

In the first shot, Jerome and Wicket joke exuberantly as they walk. Jerome tactically shows his own movement while overcoming the boundary of the glass. This expressiveness begins to flatten, however, as soon as he confronts the staff in the second shot. Jerome says with little change in his voice, “What’s up, Chief.” The staff member, who stands in the center of the first three stills answers, “How’s it going?” Jerome suddenly sounds subdued when he answers, “Alright.” He then tilts the camera down (movement from Still 2 to Still 3), corresponding with the shift in activity. Jerome then arcs the camera up and to the left and zooms in before he says, “Just a video.” He recovers some by refocusing on the adult who is not looking at him, but he abruptly stops recording when the first adult begins to ask another question. The activity took a serious turn, and this was not what Jerome wanted to record. He stopped the camera. In the following brief shot seen in Illustration 30, Jerome silently records the silhouettes of three people and a dog as they walk away from him in the hall. The doors and hallway strategically frame the camera frame while the silence and increasing distance with the subject show a degree of isolation. The shift from buoyant mockery to a lonely scene of faceless people moving off in another direction demonstrates a shift from tactical solidarity with one another to a symbolically strategic distance. Power is not directly asserted in these activities.

In Jerome’s next shot, Shot 15 (Illustration 31), he enters a classroom, somewhat at the encouragement of Wicket—the only one with whom he continues to show solidarity. There are no adults present, and Jerome quickly recovers his humor but shifts his use of strategies to actions that have an effect on real time activities. Wicket immediately begins teasing the students in the room, saying, “Picture the alien!” Jerome begins with a strategic wide angle shot before zooming in (a visual marking of the subject) and uttering something about “class monkey” (an oral definition). Jerome calls to the students , “Hey, I’m recording! This is for school!” in response to a student’s extended middle finger, having a direct effect on the activity and defining the events. At the same time, he is seeking some cooperation from the students. Jerome uses the camera, height, and his greater freedom of movement to shape the situation both in real time and for the audience. He turns the camera to a boy and girl who sit near each other, tactically catching the girl tickling the boy, and turns it to his advantage, teasing them more and threatening to expose this behavior to their respective girl- and boy-friends. The power Jerome gains in this moment has both strategic and tactical qualities, but there is none of the respect he ordinarily showed adults.

The camera was frequently used to tease other students—by these students and students at other schools. The major difference was that at Boarding High, the students recorded (and did not record over) these exchanges. The dynamics of such teasing was similar throughout Wicket and Jerome’s work and were quite similar to some in the pilot data, except that in this project most events containing such power accentuating teasing were followed by expressions of solidarity with the same students. The degree to which such shots reflect an assertion of power is ambiguous, but the camera—and position it enables—lends extra power to its operator (or in this case to the two of them because they both adopt that power whether they were holding the camera or not) to such an extent that the retorts seem relatively feeble. Such teasing could slide quite easily into bullying, but these students show restraint and usually seek out a moment to express solidarity without assertions of power.

A difference with this project, which is perhaps consistent with the discovery that the camera can be used to increase one’s power because it was also true of some pilot data, is that these students seemed to have little difficulty in doing close-ups of the people they recorded. Both students used the zoom feature more easily than students at the other schools and more frequently recorded while standing quite near people. Long shots also were more prevalent, thus the range was greater. At this point the evidence is inconclusive, but this differences is attributed to the difference in relationships: Wicket and Jerome showed conflict and intimacy with students routinely, but both maintained greater symbolic and actual distance and less—as well as less direct—conflict with authority figures. Close-ups of staff existed, but there were none of the extreme close-ups that existed of fellow students.

One teacher, seen in Illustration 32, clearly had a different relationship with the students and the dialogic nature of relations was particularly evident during this event. It began with the teacher coming apparently to move students out of the hallway (see Still 1and 2), but it quickly shifted as Jerome tells him what they have already recorded. The music teacher, shifting his position, then performs for them and left them alone. Two dips of the camera suggest an awareness of the potential conflict that is not apparent in Wicket or Jerome’s oral interaction, but they respond first as a silent audience taking a close-up shot and then with appreciative laughter and camera movements to follow his departure. As they leave, Wicket says, “That was a one time thing, and I recorded it.” The general response of the students (there are others there) is supported by the close-ups and actual nearness to indicate that this teacher is well liked and relatively intimate with students. The changing dynamics of this relationship are reflected in the use of close-ups and medium shots and the two downward tilts.

There was much more, however, to Wicket and Jerome’s work than the teasing of fellow students and apparent respect of authority figures. They each had moments of quiet recording, which demonstrated a more serious interest, and they interacted with the physical environment in a way that, while being quite unlike the recording activity at the other schools, revealed nuances of their relations with school and beyond. In one shot (previously discussed and shown in Illustration 14), a strategic and distant display of the neighborhood and honors dorm reflected a sense of power and humility and an expressed difference with dominant ideologies as the role of honors students is raised. Wicket and Jerome were far from silent in this shot, but as they turned from the dorms to a church, their jokes gave way to a more serious commentary about the acts of the Church in “England times” by Wicket (Illustration 33, Stills 1 and 2), which he took up again during his narration. Another shot (Still 3) used petals on the ground as a backdrop for a poem, which also suggested a more serious concern. Several shots demonstrated Wicket and Jerome’s appreciation of talents and objects with their silence and avoidance of distraction (Stills 4 through 8). These shots—particularly the ones with little commentary—clearly demonstrate that close-ups, even extreme close-ups, are not necessarily a mockery of or lack of respect toward the object or person being shown. For example, the silence shown for the guitar player in Still 4 (Clip 3) and protest when he stopped playing indicate that, in addition to playing with perspectives, some of these close-ups mean the camera operator is fully absorbed (or wanting to be) in the activity. Even in Still 8, in which the camera has been rotated to further play with perspectives, Wicket demonstrates an appreciation for the student-made murals throughout the buildings; this shot by itself is not conclusive, but when compared to the many shots of murals, their appreciation becomes evident. These shots collectively suggest that mockery frequently borders on more serious interests and critiques, but whether close-ups of objects have an equivalent meaning as close-ups of people currently remains speculative.

The shots used in the edited piece show a consistent concern with different aspects of authority, which is sprinkled throughout their work. Stills from each of the shots that were used are shown in Illustration 34. Additional stills from the “Church” shot and the “Helicopter” shot are shown in the previous illustration. There were only four shots of the camera zooming in and out or shakily displaying the objects with the camera zoomed in. Parts of the “Jesus” shot were shown five times at the beginning and three times at the end. The interpretation is heavily influenced by the original sound, which was not included in the edit, and the narration. Unfortunately, it is not known what song was intended as the soundtrack. When recording the “Jesus” shot (Play Video), Wicket said ominously, “Jesus is watching you!” and the discussion around the antenna was about nobody knowing what it was for with the suggestion that it must be for something secretive. The Church was described as persecuting people, and Wicket discussed not being Christian during his narration. The only comment made about the helicopter was “Where did it go?” as Wicket looked for it to emerge from behind the tree. This search for helicopter, as can be seen in Still 6 (Play Video), was included in the edited project. Surveillance, persecution, and imposition of a foreign authority are thus suggested.

The last comment on how central a role authority had in their relations with school—and a testimony to ways in which it interferes with education—is given to Wicket. At the beginning of their camera work on the second day, Wicket happened upon an intriguing scene, which he recorded while imitating a news reporter. Illustration 35 contains the clip, and the following describes what happened:

Wicket yells, “him,” as the camera starts. A student is seen running through the central quad. He yells, “He's on the run!” The student gestures with his middle finger. Wicket yells, “He's running! Who are you running from?” The student runs behind the wall that shades the art classroom. He bends over to catch his breath and looks over his shoulder. The student answers, “Security.” Wicket repeats, “He's running from security.” The runner whispers, “Fuck you,” and extends his middle finger again. The camera turns toward the quad and the area beyond it. Wicket says, “Oh, man. Oh, there’s the security!” He looks for them with the camera until they are found. Two men walk beneath the trees on the other side of the quad. Jerome asks, “Where they at?” Wicket answers, “They're over there.” He shows the security. Wicket almost sings, “Security.”Wicket says, “Osh. Here they come. They're looking this way.” The student is looked for and then shown again. Wicket says, “Here's a runaway slave against those bozos.” The camera searches for the two men again. Wicket continues, “...right there. This is live!” The student is shown again. Wicket continues, “This guy just ran from security, and he's from Choice Dorm [said, Choy Store, it seems; this is a dorm where students are placed as punishment, but another clip provides evidence that there is some meaning to the way Wicket says it].” Jerome asks [barely audible], “Are you recording?” Wicket answers while laughing, "Yeah." The camera stops.

This shot is simply about a boy playing with a camera, who happened to come upon another boy fleeing from punishment, but in his role as witness—which would usually have gone unnoticed and been invisible—he uses this moment to engage with a conflict that clearly permeates his school life. He zooms in and out on and pans back and forth between the participants of the drama, using both the strategic technique of having a celestial-like view and the tactical technique of distorting perspectives. Who does he identify more with at this moment? These are the same security from the shots discussed at the beginning of this section. They like and respect these men, though not without reservations. The runaway is, however, a student like themselves. He is not happy with Wicket, perhaps fearing that they will reveal his location, but Wicket does not show any concern for this, laughing at the standard gestures. He is surprisingly comfortable being a witness but transforms what would have been a passive role into an active one by assuming the tone of a news reporter. When placed in the context of half the student-body recently being sent home, the routine ambivalence expressed in shifting seamlessly from strategies to tactics—in a way not seen in the other projects—and the high degree of playful conflict also shifting quickly into expressions of solidarity is unsurprising. The video displays a student-school relationship of ambivalent engagement. These students’ relative success in creating a meaningful project is likely related to this engagement and perhaps to the openness of the ambivalence.

Contents

Forward to Chapter 5: Conclusions?
OR
Forward to Development In Suburban High's "The Good, The Bad, And The Techies"

References