Crossing the river between cultures: Representing the ‘Other’ in the travel documentary series

Crossing the river

between cultures

Representing the ‘Other’ in the travel

documentary series

Contents

Introduction...2

Chapter one...5

First steps into the wilderness of travel series and ethnographic film...5

Tourism: the all-inclusive resort for ‘authentic’ culture...7

Magnifying the distance between ‘us’ and ‘them’...10

Chapter two...12

Attempting to underline ‘exoticizing’ and ‘essentializing’ images...12

Langs de Oevers van de Yangtze...13

De bergen achter Sotsji...14

Onze man in Teheran...15

The travel series...16

The ethnographic film...24

The presenters...31

Chapter 3...35

Building a theoretical framework...36

Critical representations of country politics and tourism...39

Cultural representations and the voice of the ‘Other’...46

The power relations between (western) filmmaker and (eastern) participants

...50

The in-between position of the presenters...52

Conclusion...54

Bibliography...59

Introduction

In 2014 the discussion night Cineblend was organized by the Dutch documentary festival Beeld voor Beeld and the Dutch foundation for visual anthropology (SAVAN) with the title: “De reisdocumentaire een nieuw genre?” (the travel documentary a new genre?). The main reason for this discussion was formulated by the festival as followed:

The travel documentaries from VPRO have become very popular in a short amount of time and may even have led to a new genre, a mixture between the travel program, journalism and the documentary. […] Can we in fact identify a new genre here? If so, where does it differentiate itself from other genres? Where can the line be drawn between journalism and documentary? (dezwijger.nl)

Though it never has been officially labelled as a new genre, the term ‘reis documentaireseries ’ or ‘reis documentaires’ (travel documentary series) can in the meantime be found on the website of the NPO (Dutch public broadcasting network) (npo.nl). Many of these travel documentaries have been praised by critics and scored high viewing ratings (dezwijger.nl). Van Dis door Afrika (2008), O’Hanlons helden (2011) and Onze man in Teheran (2015) have even won the Dutch jury price for best television program of the year (de Zilveren Nipkowschijf). It is furthermore emphasised by Dutch broadcasters that these popular travel documentaries have become increasingly valuable to provide viewers with knowledge about other countries (ncrv.nl). Langs de

oevers van de Yangtze (2015) for instance is praised for showing multi-faceted images of

China, De bergen achter Sotsji (2014) for its intimate encounters with inhabitants from the Caucasus, and Onze man in Teheran for undermining all our prejudgements about Iran (nipkow.nl).

These positive reviews stand in sharp contrast with academic critique on travel series. Many authors (e.g. Duffy and Mangharam, Waade, Dunn, Fürsich, Fürsich and Kavoori, Hanusch, MacDonald) have argued that travel series produce problematic and one-sided images of other countries. What makes these travel documentaries then so considerably different from other travel series? Does this ‘new television genre’ undermine or even overthrow problematic cultural representations of other travel

series? To answer these questions this thesis will examine the travel documentaries as new television genre in more detail. Although documentary film and travel programs have been scrutinized by scholars, this specific type of hybrid genre, which seems to fuse documentary and travel program together, has not been examined carefully in previous academic writing. The three series that will be examined in this thesis are Langs de

oevers van de Yangtze, De bergen achter Sotsji and Onze man in Teheran.

There are three main reasons why these three travel documentaries are especially relevant to examine. In the first place, these three shows are praised by critics for providing outstanding insights in represented cultures. The Nipkow jury report on Onze

man in Teheran for instance states: “We see an Iran as we have never seen it before, a

country where nothing is approved but everything is possible, like the subtitle states: a series that tares down all our prejudgement and fixed images” (“Onze man in Teheran Winnaar Zilveren Nipkowschijf 2015”). The shows also received high viewing ratings (Tomas, mediacourant.nl, “Jaarrapport 2014 - Kijkonderzoek”). For instance, the first episode of Langs de oevers van de Yangtze was watched by over one million viewers in the Netherlands (Tomas). The second motive for selecting these series is that Langs de

oevers van de Yangtze, De bergen achter Sotsji and Onze man in Teheran appear in my

view representational series for the entire Dutch television genre of the ‘reisdocumentaires’ (travel documentaries). The third motive for examining these three series is their cultural representations of non-Western cultures. Countries like Russia, Georgia, Armenia, China and Iran may for many viewers be relatively unfamiliar outside of some news reports, films and other travel related programming. The cultural representations in the travel documentaries have therefore the potential to change the viewers outlook on these countries. In addition, other travel series have been criticized especially for their problematic representations of non-Western cultures (Fürisch, “How can global journalists 62). This makes cultural representations in Langs de oevers van de

Yangtze, De bergen achter Sotsji and Onze man in Teheran fruitful to compare with

problematic cultural images in other travel programs.

The travel documentaries have aspiring objectives for their series. Presenter Ruben Terlou formulates his ambition for the series Langs de oevers van de Yangtze as followed:

“I want to show China in the way that I’ve experienced it, since it is unfamiliar for many people. […] I also want to show how the many inhabitants

experience China in present times. […] The viewer learns a lot about the lives of many people, what they love, but also about their problems. I want to show the human side of the Chinese people and the many variations in their country. (Witte)

The main question that will lead this thesis is therefore: To which extent do Langs de

oevers van de Yangtze, De bergen achter Sotsji and Onze man in Teheran offer solutions to

overcome problematic cultural representations and to which extend do they fail their own promise?

The first chapter will introduce the travel documentaries resemblances with the travel series and ethnographic film and then a theoretical framework from the sociology of tourism, post-colonialism and anthropology will be assembled. The second chapter will focus on the problematic cultural images and views in the travel series and ethnographic film. Then the strategies of the travel documentary series will be examined that attempt to overcome these ‘essentializing’ and ‘exoticizing’ representations of the ‘Other’. The third chapter will highlight the reach and limitations of these strategies in each of the series. In the conclusion there will be evaluated on the extent to which Langs

de oevers van de Yangtze, De bergen achter Sotsji and Onze man in Teheran demonstrate

solutions and limitations in representing other cultures.

Chapter one

First steps into the wilderness of travel series and ethnographic film

The travel documentary series can be seen as part of a broader television genre, namely the travel series (also referred to as travel program, television holiday program or TV travelogue). In these programs presenters visit distant, often exotic destinations all over the world where they point out sights, often interact with local people and taste the local food (Creeber 156). Examples of these travel programs on Dutch television are 3 op Reis (2007), RTL Travel (2007), Floortje naar het einde van de wereld (2014) and Erica op reis (2011). The travel series can be seen as a hybrid genre since it incorporates elements from documentary film, lifestyle programming, educative television programs, “host-based factual entertainment”, talk shows and even TV ads (Waade 101). The travel series

can furthermore be blended with other television genres or formats. Wie is de Mol (1999) is such an example which can be seen as a mix between the travel program, reality-TV and the game show. The travel series as genre is grounded in two main fields: television entertainment and tourism (Waade 102). This thesis will focus on the representation of culture. It is therefore useful to look into the travel programs connection with tourism.

Many authors have emphasized (e.g. MacCannell, Urry, Fürsich, Fursich and Kavoori, Hanusch, Duffy) that tourism is one of the largest, and most popular industries in the world. This has led to a development of many media products related to travel (Fürsich, “Packaging culture” 204). Magazines, television programs, brochures, television adds, blogs and many other media products can be linked back to this topic.

Tourism practices have been critiqued however for their problematic positions towards other cultures (MacCannell and Urry). These views are often echoed in travel programs according to many authors (e.g. Duffy and Mangharam, Waade, Dunn, Fürsich, Fürsich and Kavoori, Hanusch, MacDonald), producing essentializing and exoticizing representations of the ‘Other’, which are highly problematic. For analysing these travel representations, concepts coming from post-modern theory, cultural studies, sociology and post-colonial theory are helpful to be utilized (Fürsich, “Packaging culture” 209). This chapter will therefore focus on the sociology of tourism and post-colonial theory, incorporating concepts from post-modern theory and cultural studies.

Before moving on to the field of tourism however, it is crucial to point out another genre in which the travel documentary is imbedded, namely the ethnographic film. This film category is also referred to as visual ethnography, anthropological cinema (Sikand 43) and the ethnographic documentary (Vannini 394). The ethnographic film has its roots in both documentary and anthropology. It must however not be confused with visual anthropology, which can better defined as “an umbrella concept that encompasses all aspects of visible and pictorial culture, with ethnographic film as merely one part of a larger whole” (Durington and Ruby 190). Many anthropologists and other scholars have debated over the definition of the ethnographic film (see Mathew 18, Durington and Ruby 191-192). According to Ruby these films have to “communicate anthropological insights” with the precondition to be “designed by anthropologists” (1). The film has to serve researching or teaching purposes in Ruby’s definition (Vannini 394). According to this claim, the travel documentary would not qualify as ethnographic film since it is not

strictly produced for researching purposes. The statement that ethnographic film can only be utilized by university-based ethnographers is however challenged by authors such as Crawford (74), MacDougall (“Ethnographic film” 405), Vannini (393) and Sikand (44). This film category is however problematic to define according to Heider. “In the broader sense, most films are ethnographic – that is, if we take ‘ethnographic’ to mean ‘about people’” (Heider 6). The ethnographic film can neither be labelled as researching methodology nor can it be identified as film-genre (MacDougall, “Ethnographic film” 405), though the films may “function as anthropological texts or at least provide viewers with anthropological insights” (Sikand 44). For understanding the travel documentary as ethnographic film this paper will turn to Vannini’s statement that not the academic ambition but the topic should be leading in its definition. It can understood as “an audiovisual portrayal of aspects of a person or peoples way of life, regardless of who produced or directed it” (393), where the subject matter of most classic ethnographic films is focused on “customs, rituals and social organization of non-Western people” (394). As consequence of this focus, the films have been criticized for their reinforcement of asymmetrical power relations between colonizer and colonized (Mathew 19). The travel documentaries that will be analysed in this thesis share characteristics with the ethnographic film in subject matter (non-Western people), in their visual style (documentary) and through the position of the presenter (that shares characteristics with the ethnographer). The travel documentary can therefore be seen as part of the ethnographic film as film category. This argument will be made more explicit throughout the second chapter. By emphasizing here that the travel documentary can be placed under the broader category of the ethnographic film, I wish to simply point out how this television genre is also linked to anthropology, an academic discipline which has its own history of magnifying the difference between the ‘us’ and the exotic ‘Other’ (Thomas 309).

So far this chapter has made the argument that the travel documentary resembles both the travel program and ethnographic film. The travel program has its origins in tourism and the ethnographic film has its origins in anthropology. I have briefly touched upon the problematic representations of the ‘Other’ in both fields. This chapter will clarify this point in more detail using concepts from tourism studies, post-colonial theory and anthropology.

Tourism: the all-inclusive resort for ‘authentic’ culture

Since tourism was seen by many scholars as a “frivolous topic, not worthy of serious research” (Fürsich and Kavoori 152), tourism has remained relatively unstudied until two decades ago. Chang and Holt stated that tourism was seen as “a recreational activity devoid of political meaning” (102). MacCannell (1976) was one of the pioneers critically researching this area in sociology. He argues that tourism is not only worthy of scrutiny for its economic and political meaning, it can even be seen as one of the main characteristics of modern society (3). He states that ‘the tourist’ is one of the best models for explaining behavior of “the modern-man-in-general” (1). He compares the modern tourist to the social scientist in its curiosity and a superficial view on primitive, poor people and other ethnicities (5). “For moderns, reality and authenticity are thought to be elsewhere: in other historical periods and other cultures, in purer, simpler lifestyles” (3). Touristic spaces are therefore presented as ‘authentic’, even though they are staged for tourist consumption. MacCannell calls this staged authenticity. “Settings are often not merely copies or replicas of real-life situations but copies that are presented as disclosing more about the real thing than the real thing itself discloses” (102). This staged authenticity can thus be seen as a paradox: a performance in order to please the modern tourists in their search for ‘naturalness’, ‘the primitive’ and ‘the exotic’.

Responding to this theory on tourism, Urry suggests that the motive of the tourist can be interpreted as an escape from everyday life rather than a search for authenticity. Though he accepts that authentic elements are helpful for understanding travel, they point to something else, they are in contrast with their everyday lives (13). MacCannell’s notion of modern tourism is reshaped by Urry to a theory on postmodern tourism. The modern tourist is evolved to a less naïve postmodern tourist that gazes upon other cultures.

The concept of the gaze highlights that looking is a learned ability

and that the pure and innocent eye is a myth. […] People gaze upon the world through a particular filter of ideas, skills, desires and expectations, framed by social class, gender, nationality, age and education. (Urry 1-2)

This way of looking at the world can be seen as a performance rather than a reflection on what is seen (2). To understand more specific these ‘frames’ are constructed in regard to

travel, Urry works further on Bergers notion of the tourist gaze. Tourism can be seen as an assemblage of signs constructing this gaze.

When tourists see two people kissing in Paris what they capture in the gaze is ‘timeless romantic Paris’. When a small village in England is seen, what they gaze upon is the ‘real old England’. (4-5)

The people are not so much seeking for the ‘real’ as they are seeking for signs of what they see as ‘authentic’ or ‘real’. Photographs, films, television programs and postcards are often used for capturing and objectifying these signs of ‘exotic’ and ‘authentic’ culture. This is reinforcing the tourist gaze even from the comfort of our homes (4).

In response to the commodification of travel two general types of post-modern tourists can be defined. The first one, introduced by Feifer (1985), is the post-tourist. These travelers are not seeking to find more distinguished goals from their journey and play with often spectacular signs of tourism. They understand that there is no such thing as an “’authentic’ tourism experience” and do not have to leave their homes to interact with the gazed objects (Ritzer and Liska 102).

The typical tourist experience is anyway to see named scenes through a frame, such as the hotel window, the car windscreen or the window of the coach. But this can now be experienced in one’s own living room, at the flick of a switch, and it can be repeated time and time again. (Urry 113)

The second one is referred to by Corrigan as the untourist. These travelers reject the ironic play with signs in mass tourism and are just like MacCannell’s modern tourists seeking for the ‘authentic’ experience. Corrigan illustrates this by quoting Jaqueline Huie: “Untourists ‘trek through the wilderness carrying biscuits, cheese and wine soaked maps in preference to relaxing in the comfort of an air-conditioned tour bus’”. They reject luxury and their travel motive can be better understood as an elite form of ‘authenticity’ seeking. They see themselves as culturally sophisticated travellers (104).

These concepts on tourism will help explaining different strategies of travel programs in representing other cultures. This will be examined in the second chapter. Before moving to theory on this television genre however, it is valuable to look more

specific into theory on how representations of other cultures can be produced by examining the field of post-colonial theory.

Magnifying the distance between ‘us’ and ‘them’

Problematic representations of non-western cultures have been analysed in post-colonial theory from its beginnings. Authors like Spivak, Pratt, Spurr and Bhabha have paid central attention to this subject. Pratt develops two concepts for understanding the relation between the colonizer and the colonized in travel writings. Contact zone refers to the space of the colonial encounters. “[T]hat is, social spaces where disparate cultures meet, clash, and grapple each other, often in highly asymmetrical relations of domination and subordination” (7) . These encounters are thus for a great part shaped by the power relations between traveller and locals. These encounters are often mediated into writings. This process of mediation and the cultural texts it produces are referred to by Pratt as transculturation (7-8). This theory about travel writing therefore highlights that not only the encounters themselves, but also the texts they produce underline the rational of thinking between ‘us’ and ‘them’.

One of the most influential theories on the colonial period, which has had a great impact on the field of post-colonialism is coming from Said in his book Orientalism. The concept of orientalism emphasizes how the ‘West’ (Great Britain, France and the United states especially) strengthens its own identity by constructing an image of the ‘East’, also referred to as the Orient. Said states that this construct became the logic of belief and even the basis for colonial oppression and still plays a significant role in our way of thinking. Nonetheless, these representations have less to do with these cultures as they do with “our world” (Said 12). They underline how our understanding of eastern cultures is still captured in patterns of (post)colonial thinking where we (the West) project our fantasies and desires on the construction of the Orient (Said 54-55).

This theory on orientalism has had a great influence on academic fields such as post-colonial studies, but also literature, mass communication and anthropology. Stuart Hall used this notion of thinking about the ‘Orient’ in his work on post-colonial representations. Equally to Said, he underlines that ‘power’ is critical in understanding how these post-colonial representations work.

Power[…] has to be understood here, not only in terms of economic exploitation and physical coercion, but also in broader cultural or symbolic terms, including the power to represent someone or something in a certain way - within a certain 'regime of representation'. It includes the exercise of

symbolic power through representational practices. (259)

One of the key elements of this symbolic power is the stereotype, which reduces people to simple, widely recognized and essential fixed characteristics (257-259). This process of stereotyping essentializes the ‘Other’ and can be seen as a strategy of splitting ‘us’ from ‘them’. Although many other theories on ‘otherness’ are employed in post-colonial theory, sociology of tourism and adjacent academic fields such as cultural studies and literature studies, the field of anthropology will be highlighted here for its link with the ethnographic film.

The process of othering has been central to the field of anthropology from its beginnings (Thomas 306). It is even argued by Thomas (38), Nichols (“The Ethnographer's Tale” 63) and Sax (292) that it is expected from the field of anthropology to produce this ‘difference’.

There are, of course, works that deal with conflict, disagreement about beliefs, and perspectival differences between men and women, but these themes could hardly be said to have the same centrality for the discipline as the operation of imputing difference between cultures. (Thomas 310)

One part of this process is that difference and distance becomes dramatized through representations of ‘their’ space as demarcated and separated from ‘our’ space (Said 55). This process is referred to by Said as imaginative geographies and has been applied to the field of anthropology by Gregory.

For Said, imaginative geographies are discursive formations, tense constellations of power, knowledge and spatiality, that are centred on 'here' and projected towards 'there' so that 'the vacant or anonymous reaches of distance are converted into meaning for us here’. (Gregory 29)

Gregory underlines that Said’s purpose of this concept is to show how produced images at the same time become the “politics of space” (29). It is therefore that authors such as Hymes, Asad and Clifford have recalled for radically rethinking the field of anthropology. The discipline has made a clear turn for reflexivity in the meantime, influenced by post-modern, Marxist and feminist scholars (Starn 412-413, Sikand 43) and the notion that ethnographers must focus on the ‘exotic other’ has long been abandoned (Durington and Ruby 192). Nevertheless, these exotic images can still often be found in the ethnographic film (see Sikand, Duringron and Ruby, MacDougall, Mathew, Carta and Nichols) although other films may offer possible solutions for overcoming the representational gap between ‘us’ and ’them’ (see Fürisch, Vannini, MacDougall and Nichols). The next chapter will analyse how these representations can be found in the travel documentary.

Chapter two

Attempting to underline ‘exoticizing’ and ‘essentializing’ images

In the previous chapter the argument was made that the travel documentary series resembles both travel series and ethnographic film. Moreover, concepts from tourism studies and post-colonial theory were introduced to illustrate how representations of the ‘Other’ have been problematic in tourism and anthropology. Building on these concepts, this chapter will demonstrate how travel programs and ethnographic films have been criticized for producing ‘exoticizing’ and ‘essentializing’ images of other cultures. It will furthermore be illustrated how Langs de oevers van de Yangtze, De

bergen achter Sotsji and Onze man in Teheran attempt to prevent these problematic

representations utilizing different strategies. The next chapter will reflect on the possibilities and limitations of these approaches. The current objective is merely to point out which strategies the three shows under consideration deploy to undermine ‘exoticizing’, ‘essentializing’ and stereotypical representations in the travel documentary series. The analysis in this chapter is subdivided into three main sections. The first part will focus on the problematic representations in travel series and strategies from the travel documentaries that undermine these images. The second section will do the same in regard to the ethnographic film. The third section will concentrate on the role of the presenter in the travel documentary series. Yet, before moving to the analysis, Langs de

oevers van de Yangtze, De bergen achter Sotsji and Onze man in Teheran will be

introduced here, giving a better understanding of the objective and structure of the programs.

Langs de Oevers van de Yangtze

Langs de Oevers van de Yangtze (along the banks of the Yangtze) is a travel documentary

series about China. Presenter and photographer Ruben Terlou travels alongside China’s longest river the Yangtze from the seaport at Shanghai upstream deep into the mountains of Tibet. His journey is accompanied by director and cameraman Maaik Krijgsman. The series consists of six episodes, where each new chapter is centred around one social theme in China. VPRO stresses that the contradictions in China are furthermore central in Langs de Oevers van de Yangtze. It is about both development and standstill, about preservation and innovation at the same time (“Langs de oevers van de Yangtze: alles over de serie”). Presenter Ruben Terlou justifies the series in an interview with newspaper NRC as followed:

When you think about China, than you probably think about the scandals right? People without emotions. Unified. A country with little variation. I hope to surprise people with the human side of the Chinese people. The people are central to this series, despite some things that cannot be ignored, like pollution or the obsession with wealth. (Nieber, Translated)

Terlou underlines here that the interactions with locals are central to the series. With these encounters he wishes to show the human side of the Chinese inhabitants and illustrate the different points of view within the Chinese population through which stereotypical images of China are undermined.

The first episode “De Chinese droom” (the Chinese dream), is filmed in Shanghai. Terlou follows some newcomers to the city dreaming of financial success, but also struggling with societal pressure. The second episode “Double Happiness”, filmed in Nangjing, is focussing on how love and happiness has become an issue for many Chinese citizens. It is hard for highly educated women and a large number of lower educated men to find a partner due to social rules. The third episode, “De grote roerganger” (the great helmsman), gives insight into Mao Zedong’s popularity in China, despite the tens of

millions of Chinese people that died through starvation and violence during his dictatorship. The forth episode, titled “De dam” (the dam), is filmed in and around the Three Gorges Dam. The construction of the dam has had a huge impact on the environment and the lives of locals surrounding it. The fifth episode “Pretpark China” (Amusement park China) is focussing on leisure time and jobs in the entertainment business. It is a field where many sacrifices are made for pursuing success, even for children. The sixth and last episode “Snelweg naar Tibet”, (highway to Tibet) concentrates on the new highway through Tibet. Traditions of minorities are threatening to disappear due to its impact.

De bergen achter Sotsji

De bergen achter Sotsji (the mountains behind Sochi) is a travel documentary series

presented by Jelle Brandt Corstius and directed by Hans Pool. The journey starts at the Russian city Sochi, filmed preliminary to the 2014 Olympics. From here they continue their trip across the mountains of the Caucasus through Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan in an old Russian van. The series consists of six episodes, each one focussing on other ethnic groups that live in these former regions of the Soviet Union. Brandt Corstius explains that the series main focus lies on the small ethnic groups that are often unfamiliar to the viewers.

The first episode “Voorbij Sotsji” (beyond Sochi) focusses on the changes in Sochi, the Russian anti-gay laws and the Circassians, a Caucasian folk that lives near to Sochi. The second episode “De lange arm van Stalin” (the long arm of Stalin), concentrates on the history of the Sovjet Union and the life of Stalin. Brandt Cortius visits the birth place of the former dictator in Georgia, crosses the border to Azerbaijan where Stalin was captured and speaks to old people from a mountain village about the damages of his regime. The third episode “De wandelende grens” (the moving border), is about the inhabitants of Georgia protecting the border with Russia. The Russians are continually moving their border posts further into the Georgian country. The forth episode, “Het land dat niet mag bestaan” (the country which is not allowed to exist) focusses on the Chechens, a folk with a tragic history of war and deportation and a big problem of young men joining the Muslim extremists in Syria. The fifth episode “Arm Armenië” (poor Armenia), gives insight into the history and political situation of Armenia, which is completely dependent on Russia due to its problems with Turkey. It is one of the

Caucasian’s poorest countries. The sixth and last episode “Azerbeidzjan” (Azerbaijan) is filmed in Baku, capital of Azerbaijan, a country which is extremely wealthy due to its oil reserves. Brandt Corstius gives insight into the history of the region, speaks to billionaires and takes an oil bath.

Onze man in Teheran

Onze man in Tereran (our man in Teheran) is a travel documentary series about Iran,

filmed in and around its capital Teheran, presented by Thomas Erdbrink and directed by Roel Broekhoven. Erdbrink underlines that although categorized as travel series by VPRO, Onze man in Teheran differentiates itself from other travel series such as the ones presented by Brandt Corstius. The show is more focussed on his personal life and his family, friends and colleagues in Iran. Erdbrink even argues that it can hardly be seen as travel series since he is one of Teherans inhabitants, not visitors. “I am not an expat that lives in a luxurious district of the city. I share joy and sorrow with these people”. One of the series objectives is countering the images of Iran as a uniform country. “The state determines the way you should behave in Iran. Nevertheless, Iran is not a homogeneous country: there are no fixed values and stereotypes. Hardliners determine the rules, but not the society. There are always two faces” (vpro.nl). Erdbrink thus explains that Onze

man in Teheran is concentrated on his daily life and the heterogeneity of Iran.

The first episode “Liefde in de Islamitische Republiek” (love in the Islamic Republic), focusses on Erdbrinks personal life with his wife, in-laws and his positon as western journalist in Teheran. It furthermore offers insight into the position of women in Iran. In the second episode “Het land waar niks mag maar alles kan” (the country where nothing is approved but everything is possible), Edbrink gets reminded of the invisible rules of the Islamic Republic due to the arrest of a colleague journalist. Moreover, he goes in conversation with ‘Mr. Bigmouth’, a man that stands in front at every Friday prayer and anti-America demonstration, expressing his hate for America and Israel. The third episode “De rivier des levens” (the river of life) focusses on the superstition of the Iranian people and the Iranian social codes, also known as ‘tarof’. Furthermore, Edbrink investigates what the martyrdom means for the Iranians. The fourth and last episode “Oog om oog” (an eye for an eye) is centred around rules that have become more strict for women in Iran. Moreover, Erdbrink visits a woman that got doused with a can of

sulfuric acid after she rejected a suiter. According to Iranian law she had the right to take revenge, but in the end she forgave him.

The travel series

International travel nowadays can no longer exclusively be associated with the West visiting other regions on the globe. Wealthy people from all over the world visit other countries for pleasure and work. This has led to a wider interest for potential travellers in information, recommendations and entertainment for possible vacation areas. The global market has therefore become more interested in advertisement surrounding these media products (Fürsich and Kavoori 153). The travel program as genre has therefore been critiqued for being closer to non-critical entertainment such as lifestyle television (Waade, Hanusch, Fürsich and Kavoori) and the docusoap (Dunn) than critical journalistic and documentary programs. This has led to what Fürsich characterizes as “the production of travel programs that reduce the complexity of intercultural encounters to a harmless celebration of difference devoid of any critical context” (“Packaging culture” 224). The tendency of many travel shows is to focus on the first person narrative of presenters. In many cases their personality and performance becomes more important than the location itself (Dunn 41). This is not only the case within the genre of travel series, but also within travel journalism in general (Duffy and Mangharam 10). One problem is that these first person narratives are often devoid of political context. Why aren’t many travel series more critical on politics, or on the tourism industry? Fürsich answers this question with regard to programs broadcasted on the cable network Travel Channel. She argues that due to globalization, media systems have become overly commodified and commercialized. With the goal of attracting a global audience, being critical is considered too risky. Viewers from other (non-western) countries are likely to perceive ‘us’ in a different manner making “criticism and other traditional journalistic investigative practices difficult and even unwelcome” (“Packaging culture” 222). Commercial interests are therefore limiting the possibilities of critical cultural representations in travel programs. This argument should however be placed in context. Fürsich is referring to American programs broadcasted by the commercial network Travel Channel, which is owned by Discovery Communications Inc. The shows are produced for a global audience (“Packaging Culture” 208). These conditions are considerably different from the travel programs produced by public

broadcasters, primarily suited for a national audience. This is the case for many Dutch travel programs (e.g. 3 op Reis, Floortje aan het einde van de wereld, Erica op Reis). By emphasising dissimilarities between production conditions and intended audiences for American and Dutch travel shows, I wish to point out that Fürisch’s critique is not appropriate for all Dutch travel programs. This does not mean however that all of these Dutch shows therefore resemble critical journalistic and documentary programs. Waade has made an analysis of travel programs broadcasted by the Danish public broadcaster and intended for a national audience, which comes closer to the travel documentaries conditions. It is therefore that Waade’s analysis is helpful to examine. She focusses the different communicative and aesthetic features of the genre.

Travel series are not similar to advertisements in terms of formal features and format, but as a communicative mode, there are several similarities between the two genres. At the same time one might question whether travel series are related to documentaries as a genre and shouldn’t just be characterized as light entertainment. (Waade 102)

It is therefore useful to distinguish different types of travel programs. Waade identifies three main communicative modes in the travel program as genre: consumer mode,

factual entertainment mode and documentary mode. The communicative modes are

“related to basic expectations and expressions in a specific communicative act” (Waade 102). They are referring to the mode in which the viewer is addressed.

In the consumer mode the viewer is addressed as consumer. Sensuous and tempting images is supported by lighthearted music. In these shows hosts will often give tourist information and concrete advice for travelers. The host plays an important role in reviewing the destination, food, sights, and encounters with locals and other tourists (Waade 103). Many Dutch travel shows incorporate elements from this communicative mode. Groeten van MAX (2008) is a studio program that focusses on unfavorable consumer experiences on holidays and shares consumer advice for travelers. 3 op Reis also incorporates light music, spectacular images and the host often share travel advice, though also informing viewers with some political and historical context of visited countries. An unmixed form of the this communication mode is however not to be found

on Dutch television. Main functions of the consumer mode are entertaining and advising the viewer.

The factual entertainment mode is a form of “host-based feel-good TV”. The viewer is here addressed as friend. This mode incorporates many subcategories such as lifestyle programs, game shows, reality TV and docusoaps. Dramatic conflict might be used in this mode of communication. “Focus is on sociality, intimacy, traveling as lifestyle, visual pleasure and imagination”(Waade 103). Examples of Dutch travel shows that incorporate these elements are Droomhuis gezocht (2010) (lifestyle), Wie is de Mol (game show), Spoorloos (1990) (docusoap), and De gevaarlijkste wegen van de wereld (2016) (reality TV). Though these programs may differ in many essential features, they have the same ambition: entertaining the viewer.

The third communicative mode is the documentary mode, focusing on informing the viewer with journalistic arguments and facts. The viewer is addressed in this mode as citizen. The host is authoritative, typically male and the participants or locals function as victim, expert or journalistic informants (Waade 103). Though Langs de oevers van de

Yangtze, De bergen achter Sotsji and Onze man in Teheran may seem more obvious to

embody this category, many other travel series also share elements from this communicative mode. Erica op Reis and Floortje naar het einde van de wereld also incorporate political and historical arguments about visited countries.

Many travel programs shift between the three modes of communication. A hard line between the three modes is therefore unfavourable to draw. They can rather be seen as ideal types (see Weber). Nevertheless, it can be helpful to point out that the objectives from different travel shows can differ to a high extend. Some may focus primarily on informing viewers about other cultures, though others may view this as less critical. Waade is however critical on the journalistic arguments provided by the travel shows. After analysing the travel programs from the public broadcaster in Denmark she concludes:

To understand the cultural and democratic value of travel series as a popular TV genre in the context of public service broadcasting, it is not the fact that the series contain educative and enlightening information about foreign cultures, told in an entertaining and popular way. Rather it is tourism and

media consumer culture as such, that has to be seen as valuable democratic and cultural practice. (Waade 114-115)

Though I agree to that many travel series can be seen as part of tourism and consumer culture and many series lack of “educative and enlightening information”, I think this argument is not appropriate for whole genre on Dutch television. This is part of the logic behind the separation between the travel series and the travel documentary series in my analysis. While representation of foreign culture is central to both, the travel documentary series seems to utilize strategies to avoid the problematic representations for which the travel series has been criticized by many (Hanusch, MacDonald, Duffy and Mangharam, Waade, Dunn, Fürsich, Fürsich and Kavoori).

The first critique is concerning representation of politics and tourism. Fürsich argues that the travel program in general lacks in challenging local political conditions and overlooks issues of present-day mass tourism (222-223). To explain this point in some more detail it is helpful to highlight what MacCannell’s has called the dilemma of the anti-tourist versus the pro-tourist.

Tourists are not criticized […] for leaving home to see sights. They are reproached for being satisfied with superficial experiences of other people and places. [T]ourist shame is not being based on being a tourist but on not being a tourist enough, on a failure to see everything the way it ‘ought’ to be seen. (10)

The point of issue that MacCannel identifies here, is that the implications of tourism are not challenged. Travelers do not confront the issues of mass tourism. The impact of staged authenticity on the local economy is for instance overlooked. “The modern critique of the tourist is not an analytical reflection on the problem of tourism – it is part of the problem” (MacCannel 10). The untourist embodies the dilemma that MacCannell points out here. Though the untourist rejects this ironic play with signs, the impact of mass tourism itself is not challenged by these travellers, nor do they reflect on their own tourist practices. Fürsich argues that this type of post-modern tourist can be distilled from the preferred travellers that travel programs construct. “The featured type of tourism structures the text of these programs. These types delimit the texts and all

aspects of these productions such as the choice of topics, locations, hosts, interviewees, perspectives and aesthetics”(“Packaging Culture” 209). Programs that are characterized for embodying the untourist as preferred traveller, attempt to find “out of place” and authentic experiences and though being critical of other tourists, their own practices are not being reflected on. They acknowledge problems of mass tourism, but instead of concentrating on these issues, they offer an alternative of tourism, presenting ‘authentic’ experiences.

Other shows avoid political issues and mass tourism due to other travel motives. The preferred traveller constructed by these shows is focussed on positive travel experiences. Presenters actively engage with local practices and try to find out what is ‘special’ and ‘typical’ about certain places, traditions and people. The programs celebrate cultural difference. Political and historical issues are only mentioned on the side (“Packaging Culture” 214-215).

Travel programs embodying one of these preferred travellers are therefore criticized for their representations on politics and tourism. The travel documentary series therefore try to actively engage with country politics and implications of tourism. This point will be illustrated through three examples.

In the first episode of De bergen achter Sotsji, “Voorbij Sotsji” (beyond Sochi), Brandt Corstius elaborates on the new Olympic stadiums that are built for the Olympics of 2014. He explains through voice-over:

The brand new stadiums of Russia, this how the Russians want to be pictured by foreign countries. The Olympic games are very precious to Putin. […] The Olympics has never been so expensive. Fifty billion euro’s has been spent (01:45-02:05, translated from Dutch)

The voice-over is supported by images of a building excavation, with a stadium in the background. Brandt Corstius then interviews two boys and an old man who explain to him how the city has changed over the last years. These conversations are accompanied with images of an immense construction site (02:05-05:10). The voice-over and interviews give a critical view on the tourism industry and Russian policy as a result of underlining costs of the Olympics and its impact on inhabitants of Sotsji.

In the same episode Brandt Coristius shares a critical view on the political climate in Russia concerning gay people. He illustrates this through one of his own experiences.

A few years ago I was sitting in the metro in Moscow and a moment before I got out, a man came towards me, slapped me on the back of my head and called me a faggot. […] When I arrived at my friend’s house, my friends started to laugh because of my blue shoes. Blue isn’t a color that is worn in Russia because it is associated with homosexuality. Another lesson learned. But now there is a new law in Russia: the anti-gay law and every sign of sympathizing with gay people is illegal. […] When I wear a rainbow t-shirt I will get arrested. (05:20-06:08, translated from Dutch)

Brandt Corstius then interviews a group of gay people about how their situation has changed due to this new law. They explain that this law aligns homosexuality with paedophilia. They therefore are no longer safe to express themselves or even walk through the streets (06:13-09:20). This problem is further illustrated by an interview with an Russian gay man. He tells about how he and his boyfriend got beaten up by a group of men and no eyewitness reached out for help. He continues to explain how the government is putting out notes in his building to warn neighbours for the presence of homosexual’s in the flat. This is all a result of the new anti-gay law (09:30-12:26). This example shows how De bergen achter Sotsji communicates a critical view on Russian politics through underlining the harmful social consequences of a new law.

In the fifth episode of Langs de oevers van de Yangtze, “Pretpark China” (Amusement park China), Terlou visits an amusement park called ‘Dwarf Empire’. He explains that this theme park is only inhabited by people with a growth disorder. They perform two times a day with a show that incorporates dancing and singing. Terlou continues in explaining that this amusement park is a popular attraction for Chinese tourists (25:20-25:40). There is a clear focus on the personal stories of the residents. Terlou interviews the host of the performance about the reasons for participating in this act. The man explains that nobody wanted to hire him due to his growth disorder and that after being rejected many times he drank a small bottle of pesticide to kill himself, but it did not work. One day he found another little man performing at the supermarket. That man learned him how to perform. This is the first place where he feels appreciated

(27:15-30:28). Terlou also speaks to a man who works at the supermarket in the entertainment park. He explains to the presenter that after he graduated cum laude from medical school, there was no hospital that wanted to hire him due to his growth disorder. He takes Terlou to the room where he sleeps on the terrain. It is a small room which he shares with one of the other residents. He continues to explain that he got depressed after being rejected that many times. When he first got here he felt like he was not fitting into the group of people here. But surprisingly he is now living here for three years (31:40-36:30). At the end of his visit to the park Terlou concludes:

In the Netherlands an amusement park like this would be unimaginable and it would be prohibited as freak show. But no matter how bizarre, for many artists and residents here this is their only chance on a worthy and normal life. (37:56-38:08, translated from Dutch)

This example illustrates how tourism is critically reviewed in Langs de overs van de

Yangtze. Though presenter Terlou does not criticize the existence of this tourist

attraction, he does underline how it should be placed in a social context: these people have no other place to go. They are highly dependent on tourists like himself.

The second critique is that travel program’s ‘exoticize’ and ‘essentialize’ representations of the ‘Other’. The main reason for travel series producing these problematic images is formulated by Fürsich as followed:

This genre is fundamentally structured by the search for difference (as the ultimate motivation of tourism in general), which results in the perpetual replay of manufacturing, celebrating and exoticizing difference. This discursive strategy relies on essentializing cultural constructs. (“Packaging culture” 223)

This essentializing of cultural constructs is thus caused by the strategy of reducing other cultures back to their ‘essence’, which may result in stereotyping (Hall 257-259). It may therefore be unsurprising that travel series have often been criticized for echoing existing cultural stereotypes (Waade 113, Dunn 53, ). Some travel shows may have attempted to counter these images by showing one counter-stereotype. Fürsich argues

that this is the strategy of rejecting the general stereotype and instead “show you what this country is really all about”. This strategy is therefore still being caught up in the search for one essential meaning (“How can global journalists” 78) . Another strategy that is used by travel programs to challenge stereotypical images is only showing the positive sides of a country and celebrating cultural difference (see Fürsich, “Packaging culture 214-215). Hall argues that these images have yet another problem. They do not naturally displace the primarily stereotypical images that are dominant in the ‘regime of representation’. Meaning is still framed through the binaries, since they remain in place. These ‘positive’ representations may not be in line with the other representations that split ‘us from ‘them’, but they are not undermining them either (274). Nevertheless, Hall provides an approach that opens up the potential for challenging stereotypes.

[This] counter-strategy locates itself within the complexities and ambivalences of representations itself, and tries to contest it from within. […] It accepts and works with the shifting, unstable character of meaning, and enters as it were into a struggle over representation, while acknowledging that, since meaning can never me finally fixed, there can never be any final victories. (274)

The cultural stereotype can therefore only be undermined through representations that acknowledge the variables and flexibility of cultures. The programs should refuse to represent a culture in essentialized terms. This is the strategy that the travel documentaries attempt to utilize in representing the ‘Other’. This argument will be illustrated through two examples.

In the first episode of Onze man in Teheran, “Liefde in de Islamitische Republiek” (love in the Islamic Republic), Erdbrink visits the parents of his Iranian secretary Sommayeh, who grew up in a small village. It is an area is more traditional compared to the modern city of Teheran. Her mother gets emotional when memorizing the time that her daughter got divorced.

God is my witness, me and my husband both did our best. […] It was very hard for me to get her stuff out of the house. She told me she was relieved. Three year after the divorce we were drinking tea. […] And Sommayeh told

me with tears in her eyes: “Mum I haven’t been able to taste anything for years. Today taste the flavour of the tea”. When I heard that, I was relieved. It was just then that I understood her (26:26-27:28).

This illustrates the gap between two generations in Iran through the emotional bond between daughter and mother, showing multiple viewpoints inside one culture. It furthermore illustrates how the (traditional) mother is not fixed in her opinion on divorce. This clip therefore underlines that cultural meaning is constantly shifting, acknowledging that there is not one essential culture but rather that each culture contains multiplicities in it.

Another example from the same episode comes from the bus ride back to Teheran. It illustrates that the strict rules of Iran are not always followed up by the people.

In the front of the bus, where women are not permitted to sit, sits madam Sadjadi. And madam Sadjadi is a truck driver. […] And she told me that she smashes every stereotype about Iran into pieces with her mighty fist. Because she says, men and women are equal, which is affirmed by the bus driver. (30:45-31:30)

Though her being a truck driver does not on itself ‘smash every stereotype about Iran into pieces’, it nevertheless illustrates, together with the other example, the variety of women and opinions inside the Iranian culture. This is also accompanied by her breaking the strict rules and the bus driver encouraging her independence. It acknowledges therefore that there is no such thing as one essential Iranian woman, or one essential view on the position of women.

The ethnographic film

Since the birth of cinema, the medium has had a clear interest in learning about the ‘Other’ through visual documentation.

The first moving images were of ethnographic interest since they could achieve a descriptive goal of illustrating faraway realities. [T]he pioneers of

visual documentation had an amateur ethnographic aim and a clear interest in exotic people. (Brutti 280)

One of the most famous examples of an early ethnographic film that had this intention, is

Nanook of the North (1922). The film is a documentation of an Inuit (Eskimo) and his

family, barely being affected by industrial technology. This film and many other ethnographic films have been criticized however for their problematic viewpoints on other cultures. The field of anthropology in general had similar issues with their representations of other cultures and they were therefore critiqued by Marxist and feminist scholars. Nevertheless, the field of anthropology has survived the poststructuralist and postmodernist critique due to radically rethinking the field. “Ethnographic film […] fell into disrepute, and […] never quite emerged with its reputation unscathed” (Sikand 43). Problems with representation on other cultures have been produced due to their patronizing attitude, colonizing gaze (Vannini 398), false interpretation (MacDougall, “Ethnographic film” 415) and lack of reflexivity (Sikand 43). This section will focus on these different aspects of critique by subdividing the ethnographic film into different modes of documentary representation presented by Nichols. It will then look into the two main traditions within the ethnographic film distinguished by MacDougall. Finally this section will analyse the different strategies utilized by the travel documentaries attempting to avoid problematic representations of the ‘Other’.

Nichols points out that the documentary genre has different modes of representation which set up as a loose framework for identifying different styles or documentaries. “[T]hey set up conventions that a given film may adopt; and they provide specific expectations viewers anticipate having fulfilled” (Introduction to documentary 99). The different modes that will be highlighted here are the poetic mode, expository

mode, observational mode and participatory mode of documentary representation. The

latter will be focused on in greater depth since the travel documentaries can be mainly identified as participatory mode, though it also shares some characteristics of the

expository mode.

Poetic documentaries are in line with the modernist avant-garde. Establishing mood and tone appears of greater interest than displaying knowledge and persuading the audience with a verbal argument. This mode has a great interest in aesthetics and

form. Information is rather communicated through a particular point of view, than a straightforward argument. “The poetic mode has many facets, but they all emphasise the ways the filmmaker’s voice gives fragments of the historical world a formal, aesthetic integrity peculiar to the film itself” (Nichols, Introduction to documentary 105). Since the conventions of these films are more focussed on their own aesthetics than transferring verified information about other cultures, it is argued by some that poetic films can never truly be identified as ethnographic films (Vannini 398).

The expository mode is in contrast to the poetic mode, focussed on communicating a straightforward didactic argument. Images serve as illustration for what is said, supporting the spoken word. The images are either accompanied by a “voice-of-God commentary” (a disembodied authoritative voice-over) or a accompanied by a “voice-of-authority commentary” (where similar to newscasts, the speaker appears on screen).

The Expository mode emphasizes the impression of objectivity and well supported argument. The voice-over commentary seems literally “above” the fray; it has the capacity to judge actions in the historical world without being caught up in them (Nichols, Introduction to documentary 107).

Ethnographic films utilizing this mode of communication have often been criticized for problematic generalizations, but also for their patronizing attitude and colonizing gaze (Vannini 398).

The observational mode differs from the poetic mode and expository mode due to working less on the construction of formal patterns or persuasive argumentation. It gives the impression that the filmmaker is not intruding the behaviour of the people on screen and merely follows the events as they occur. There is no voice-over or non-diegetic music, there are no re-enactments and there are even no interviews (Nichols,

Introduction to documentary 109-110). This approach is also referred to as the

“fly-on-the-wall approach” where the film appears unmediated through the “absent presence of the camera and filmmaker” (Vannini 400-401). It seeks to be neutral and realistic. This style is most common when ethnographic films are utilized for scientific practices in the field of anthropology (Vannini 400, MacDougall 415), though it has been nearly absent on television due to its lack of format conventions and entertainment value (Vannini 401). Ethnographic films embodying this mode of representation have been criticized for

their claim of being objective and self-evident, which are seen as highly problematic. Barnouw for instance claimed that “[o]ne of the problems hanging over observer-documentaries was the extent to which the camera influenced events before it” (Barnouw 252-253). This problem is confirmed by MacDougall who states that,

[i]t became increasingly clear that the illusion of authorial invisibility could lead to false interpretation of behaviour on screen. [F]ilming does not become a simple, objective process. The camera, through its positioning and framing, continues to see selectively, and the burden of interpretation falls with a new immediacy upon the film-maker at the time of filming. (MacDougall, “Ethnographic film” 415-416)

In contrast to the observational mode, in the participatory mode the filmmaker becomes actively involved with the events on screen. The filmmaker appears among the rest of the participants and learns about their world through interviews and participant observation. A broader (historical) perspective is often introduced through these interviews, but it can also emerge “from direct, personal involvement in the events that unfold” (Nichols, Introduction to documentary 118-119). The participatory mode does not often make use of re-enactments, but the presence of the camera may generate events that would have not occurred in absence of the camera. Different from the

observational mode is the encounter between filmmaker and participant. This is not

meant to be neutral, unbiased and objective. The encounters are shaped and transformed through emotions, language, ethnicity, different interests and power imbalances. This style opens up the possibilities for reflection and negotiation in the narrative (Vannini 403). Nichols also underlines the similarities between the participatory documentary filmmaker and the anthropologist. They both go into the field, use participant observation and engage in a dialogue with (cultural) others (Introduction to documentary 115-116). It is therefore that Vannini argues that:

[A]ll participatory documentaries are inevitably ethnographic—though we may suggest that they vary in terms of degree of the “ethnographicness” of their involvement in participants’ lives and social worlds, in terms of the depth and breadth of their contextualization’s, and in terms of the

sociocultural significance of the “research questions” underlying their documentation. (401)

Vannini notes that the ethnographic films that represent culture through this

participatory mode are lately being predominant on television (397). Though reflexivity

in the participatory mode may not undo the power imbalances between filmmaker and participant (Matthew 19), ethnographic films in this mode avoid critiques of being too patronizing, manipulative and moralizing (for which the expository mode has been critiqued), “because they leave their subject matter relatively open to the audience interpretation” (Vannini 403). This mode is predominantly present in the travel documentary series. This will be illustrated through the use of one example.

In de first episode of De bergen achter Sotsji Brandt Corstius is taken along with a man who organized a traditional festival of Caucasian ethnic group in Russia. Brand Corstius asks questions about the festival and Caucasian culture in the car. When they arrive at the festival the organizer points out the different activities, explaining what the presenter is seeing and relating the activities to their traditions. Then the presenter is accompanied to the table of the chief. After drinking their national drink, Brand Corstius sits down with some of the elderly people including the chief. They eat and drink together and the presenter brings out a toast to their hospitality and shares his views on their festival and culture (18:16-24:28). These techniques utilized by the travel documentary are grounded in the early cinéma vérité (truthful cinema), which is distinct from its observational, ‘fly-on-the-wall’ counterpart direct cinema.

The direct cinema documentarist took his camera to a situation of tension and waited hopefully for a crisis; the Rouch version of cinéma vérité tried to precipitate one. The direct cinema artist aspired to invisibility; the Rouch cinéma vérité artist was often an avowed participant. The direct cinema artist played the role of uninvolved bystander; the cinéma vérité artist espoused that of provocateur (Barnouw 254-255)

Different from direct cinema’s approach of observing people from a distance, is that the presenter is trying to blend in with locals by joining one of their activities. He is furthermore in dialogue with the other participants through which the patronizing

attitude and colonial gaze from the expository mode is avoided. Different also from the

expository mode and observational mode, is that Brandt Corstius is not pretending to be

neutral and objective.

Different from most participatory documentaries analysed by Vannini however, is that the travel documentary series makes use of “voice-of-authority commentary” (voice-over). This seems more in line with the expository mode of representation than the participatory mode. Nevertheless, Langs de oevers van de Yangtze, De bergen achter

Sotsji and Onze man in Teheran, attempt to avoid critiques of the expository mode

(patronizing, colonizing and generalizing) through the different positions of the presenters. The next section will clarify this point in more detail. For the moment this section will focus on the participatory mode which is predominantly present in the travel documentaries. To understand why this mode of representation has the potential to challenge exoticism, it is helpful to look into MacDougall’s main traditions of ethnographic filmmaking: illustrative and revelatory.

Illustrative ethnographic films make use of images either as data to be elucidated by means of a spoken commentary or as visual support for verbal statements. The form has often lent itself to misuse, since a plausible narration script can often impart authority to the most fragmentary images. That possibility has encouraged the gathering of attractive but disconnected material and the creation of "films" out of material which does little to substantiate the assertions of the commentary (MacDougall, “Ethnographic film” 413)

These films are structured similar to a public presentation or lecture. These ethnographic films present a verbal argument, lecturing the audience from a superior expert position. It can therefore be considered closer to written anthropology. These films resemble the expository mode of documentary representation through their “voice-of-God commentary”.

Revelatory films, on the other hand, require the viewer to make a continuous interpretation of both the visual and verbal material articulated by the filmmaker. Voice-over narration need not make images wholly illustrative in

character provided the voice is an integral part of the subject matter (MacDougall, “Ethnographic film” 413).

Instead of letting the voice-over determine the structure of the film, the narratives from these documentaries are most often structured chronologically through the events on screen. Very different from illustrative films, is the hesitant position of the filmmaker. Overarching generalizations rarely occur and the viewer is given more interpretative freedom. These documentaries have different objectives from their illustrative counterpart: they focus more on exploring than teaching (Carta 409). Both observational

mode and participatory mode can be placed in this tradition of revelatory filmmaking.

Nevertheless, the hard distinction between the two traditions is nowadays less appropriate than in 1960s and 1970s. Ethnographic films that are purely illustrative are rarely produced (Carta 410). The documentaries analysed by Mathew, Vannini, Sikand and Carta are therefore all closer to the revelatory ethnographic film. Since the

participatory mode is predominantly present in the travel documentary series, they can

also be seen to share characteristics of the revelatory tradition. The reason for pointing this out, is that MacDougall, Vannini and Carta conclude that viewers can learn from participatory and revelatory films not just by reading the documentaries like texts, they learn from the films through bodily experiences (MacDougall, The Corporal Image 5, Vannini 404-405, Carta 411-414). Although these images are mediated they nonetheless “preserve many qualities of the ‘real’” and carry the potential to challenge the notion of cultural differences and correct exoticism (Carta 110-112).

Words like ‘real’ and ‘authentic’ have been so far highly problematic in this thesis since they point to staged authenticity and essentializing views one other cultures. Here however, these words point to something different: it is used to refer to a genuine bodily experience of the viewer. It is therefore less concerned with how ‘real’ or ‘authentic’ the represented cultures are and more concerned with how authentic and real the experience feels for the viewer. This may result in the spectator identifying with the ‘Other’.

In doing so, they can really counterbalance the prescriptive, divisive character of cultural typologies by addressing the senses directly. This is why the revelatory film, more often than the illustrative film, resists the attraction to